Government Housing Targets - So Who Is Going to Build Them?

CalmLemons on 16/06/2024 - 20:04
Last edited 17/06/2024 - 07:59 by 1 other user

Victoria needs millions of new homes. Here’s where they will be built

It's a bit of a joke.

Along with other developers we are all hesitant to build given the interest rate environment, rising construction costs and lack of labour, grouping of land taxes affecting cash flow, combined with new energy efficiency ratings, plus an increase of 40-60% in insurance costs.
Most guys I know are just finishing up and that's it. We have lots of sites with plans approved, but will most likely sell them. Most of these sites would not be suitable by themselves as a PPR.

Remember only small scale developers do townhouse lots of 4-8 or less. Any bigger you go mid tier and apartment blocks etc all go with larger developers who are falling like flies as they cannot find the trades to tender for these jobs as they are often much less lucrative than smaller builds.

So I'm very interested to find out what exactly the government thinks is going to happen after hammering down on developers with red tape for decades and lately smashing out the land taxes especially on vacant land whilst we have been waiting for planning to go through?

Home & Garden

Comments

  • garddn on 17/06/2024 - 08:24
    +6

    Just ain't gone happen. Just like their walked back targets they announced before the election.

    2 million homes in 27 years equals 74075 per year which equals 202 houses built per day.
    Just ain't gonna happen.

    Yet people still fall for their lies, just like comm games, the extra 4000 ICU beds or the previously announced housing targets.

    • corvusman on 18/06/2024 - 10:00
      +2

      Yet people still fall for their lies

      We don't, we simply have no means to do anything. Libs, Labor, Greens, put any name here - they all are the same, they all do the same. It doesn't matter who you vote for - you simply swap one talking head for another.

  • gyrex on 17/06/2024 - 08:42
    +11

    Anyone who watches the site inspector on YouTube/Social Media knows that this is a disaster waiting to happen. The swathes of dodgy Victorian builders can't even manage to build the current demand of houses at a third world quality at the current rate, let alone build more at an inflated rate…

    • pizzip on 18/06/2024 - 12:37
      +4

      How are the people who build those monstrosities featured in his videos even qualified tradespeople? The majority of these new builds are so bad that I'm not sure anyone building them even knows what they're doing.

      • joelmuzz on 18/06/2024 - 17:49
        +2

        You only have to attend TAFE one day a week for 3 years, and work for peanuts for 4 years.
        There is really zero enforcement or skill evaluation beyond that.
        If it was being done right the inspectors would randomly attend sites and enforce a demerit points system to suspend license pending more TAFE, and ban the worst cases. But nothing happens.

  • Duckie2hh on 17/06/2024 - 09:10
    -4

    Mum and dad landlords will build them, then get bashed by the government for being landlords.

  • Dollar General on 17/06/2024 - 09:51
    +1

    Buy a few cruise ships and dock them in Circular Quay and Docklands

  • RiseAndRuin on 17/06/2024 - 10:42

    They won't be built, people will just move from Vic to WA…

  • Benoffie on 17/06/2024 - 11:09
    +2

    We're in the same boat. Currently working with a Master Builder and he's offloading land with planning approvals, not taking on much new stuff.

    First - he's at capacity
    Second - there's huge supply chain delays which warehousing and pre planning cant overcome
    Third - prices are moving quarterly
    Fourth - recession

    Immigration might be high and that might be driving prices for the average punter. But many builders have been around a long time - the ones that survive wont take on more than they can chew - just enough to keep workers on.

  • McSquintus on 17/06/2024 - 11:20
    +1

    If we are lucky to commit and meet these numbers, will the gov also plan correctly and build proper infrastructure around it? Some suburbs are a sea of houses and nothing else. Roads that barely support the planned population capacity, lack of public transport, barely any shops, cafes or just things to do have been observed in some places.

    • RiseAndRuin on 17/06/2024 - 12:36
      +4

      I believe the main plan is to increase the density in the inner and mid-ring suburbs that already have the infrastructure, so everyone can be equally miserable.

  • Danstar on 17/06/2024 - 12:19

    John Setka will. Just don't get on his bad side.

  • Drakesy on 17/06/2024 - 12:26
    +3

    Funny thing is a lot of the would be building apprentices saw the sugar hit that is driving a truck on the mines and thought, f'it i don't want to spend 4 years doing an apprenticeship in carpentary/plumbing/electricals when i can earn $130k doing sick donuts in the desert.

    we have a generational gap of trades who all took up boilermaking or heavy diesel mechanics to get on the big bucks in the mines.

    Now whoever is left is either there because they're trying to raise a family or they got kicked off the mines.
    And builders/us get to pay a significant amount more on top of it for the privilege.

    Unfortunately how developed countries got around this (America, Singapore, UAE) was to bring in lower paid, hard working immigrants. However that would create a 2 class system, something that we wouldn't do and something that Singapore and America try to hide. I can assure you if we went to Sri Lanka/Bangladesh etc and said i'll pay you $600 a week for 6 months work in Australia they'd jump at the opportunity to make their yearly wage in 2 months.

    • Ghost47 on 17/06/2024 - 15:05
      +5

      However that would create a 2 class system, something that we wouldn't do and something that Singapore and America try to hide.

      I would say that this is already starting to happen in Australia, it's just not blaringly obvious and the divide isn't large (yet). Instead of builders we've imported food delivery drivers, fast food workers and wait staff.

    • greatlamp on 18/06/2024 - 08:14

      We accept that temporary migrants pick fruit and farm, why isn't it acceptable that they build houses?

      At least it would lower the cost of housing and fix the broken economy, rather than just continuing this system that benefits only those who are already wealthy.

      • Drakesy on 18/06/2024 - 08:23

        Thats a good question.

        I guess its our tight labour laws that are responsible that requires everyone to earn a living wage.

        Admittedly yes farmers are skirting this

      • Ghost47 on 18/06/2024 - 21:06
        +2

        At least it would lower the cost of housing

        That's exactly the opposite of what politicians want buddy.

  • Euphemistic on 17/06/2024 - 16:13
    +5

    Whos going to build them? All the shonky tradies in it for a quick buck just like every other government scheme in the last 100 years.

  • 2esc on 17/06/2024 - 21:24

    It wont fix the housing problem but one way to help is make it easier for people to subdivide large house blocks. There are plenty of people who would subdivide their house block if it was cheaper and easier to do. Heaps of the elderly who want to stay in their home but dont need the full property. A major benefit of subdividing a existing property is the road, stormwater, sewage is in easy reach infrastructure doesn't in most cases have to be built.

    • Benoffie on 18/06/2024 - 11:43
      +2

      That actually isnt a solution. Look at the sh@t storm in SA where the govt is blaming SA Water for lack of infrastructure upgrades in existing areas to allow for greater infill.

      Problems -

      Existing networks are well over 100 years old in many areas.
      Water and sewerage doesnt have infinite capacity
      It costs huge money to upgrade
      There is no chance of simultaneously completing infrastructure works after all the utilities sell offs etc (nevermind rogue Councils)
      Someone has to pay for it - governments dont want to tell you that water corps are cash cows that fuel general revenue and that the lack of infrastructure upgrades is because theyve taken the money for something else.

      There are several towns and suburbs in Adelaide/SA where subdivision has been banned by a lack of infrastructure. Freeling is on top of the list. New greenfield estates in Angle Vale and Virginia are still being pumped (for sewerage).

      The government released a few ten millions worth but itll only be enough to run a mains out to Angle Vale etc.

      These works are billions worth. Who'll pay? Water users? Land buyers?

    • greatlamp on 18/06/2024 - 12:34
      +3

      You can see the results of this in Melbourne.

      Subdivision is allowed based on the '2030 plan'. As a result an entire generation of people who bought single family home blocks in the 70s and 80s are now living on land valued $2 million plus - as the land is valued on its yield as a future apartment block, while still collecting a government pension - as they don't earn an income and the family home is an exempt asset.

      They won't downsize because they would no longer get a pension once they have cash in the bank, they would no longer have a home that is increasing in value, and they would have to move out to a suburb with poor infrastructure compared to the leafy streets they are living in currently

    • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 18/06/2024 - 12:54
      +1

      Absolutely not the answer. Oldies cash in, we all pay for the extra required services.

  • Nickels n Dimes on 17/06/2024 - 21:31
    -1

    There are three aspects preventing the need/demand from ever being met: lack of skilled trades, lack of material supply, and a massive layer of bureaucratic red tape.

    Skilled trades can be imported to some degree, substituted with automation / 3D printing / brick laying robotics, or heavily reduced the need with prefabricated buildings, though of course they have other drawbacks.

    Material supply will resolve in the long term, if you have continued demand, eventually the suppliers will scale up to meet it, but at a higher cost than today, or government could theoretically open factories to fabricate locally made materials, which would help employment, environmental footprint, time and costs of building.

    The red tape of advertising, planning / DA and building permits takes about a year for most residential projects, in many countries overseas it can be a week or two, and it can cost far less to the home builder than what we pay too. Suffice to say, our planning system is stuffed and getting worse every year. However, the state governments could, in theory wipe it all away with a swipe of a pen.

  • weee on 17/06/2024 - 21:42

    when demands meet the shortage of qualified builders, we can only hope there won't be any Opal Towers…

  • McFly on 17/06/2024 - 23:53

    Sure, I'm going to believe this government on (a new set of) housing figures.

  • Mugsy on 18/06/2024 - 08:42

    Who's going to build them? The same tradies the private sector uses. Private sector builds are gonna take longer to build. We only have so many tradies.

  • imme1386 on 18/06/2024 - 11:06

    problem is the tradies who were building a lot of properties all went bust over covid i would estimate we are down 25% of companies that could do the work, if the governement put together a company and made doll workers who had a trade in carpentry work for them we could get a lot of houses built fast with the amount of people not working

    • greatlamp on 18/06/2024 - 12:44
      +1

      If there is an ongoing shortage of skilled trades doesn't that mean the workers have jobs, even if companies are going bust? Surely a skilled tradesperson would be finding a new job very easily?

      It's under 25 y.o. and 50+ that are stuck unemployed for the most part

      • imme1386 on 19/06/2024 - 22:54
        +1

        while i agree that logic does seem like its whats happening,
        how ever after seeing what centrelink are doing to people its my understanding that a skilled tradie is likely in a warehouse being made to pack orders or drive a forklift instead of build houses or buildings,

        i myself am a certified network engineer, when looking for work i was forced to goto job interviews at retail outlets and if i turned one down i got cut off payments, if you reject the job offer u get cut off, if you screw up at the job you get cut off for 6-12 weeks

        during the years i was looking for work prior to 2013 i seen carpenters, boiler makers, cabinet makers all end up in call centers or warehouses, its a shortage of work because of welfare payments.

  • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 18/06/2024 - 12:52

    Your "developer" mates are packing up their toys and leaving as they aren't making the squillions they used to make. Still crying poor despite being propped up since 2019.

    There's still absolutely tonnes of small construction going on. No idea what your original post in going on about.

    As always, the younger more ambitious generation will take the reigns and the old "developers" will go to pasture.

    • CalmLemons on 18/06/2024 - 19:06

      Yes, 100%. What construction my developers mates are doing builds, but the $60000/square builds not the $15000/square builds that are symbolic of social housing/cheap townhouse builds.

      For example, a single premium house, build would be about $1-1.5 million.

      Vs a set of 4 cheap townhouses, about $1.3 million.

      You'll find the developers who were doing 2-4 townhouses have mostly gone. Those that are doing it are actually owned by the trades themselves.

      The margin on projects were 15-35%.

      Not squillions.

      • AngoraFish on 18/06/2024 - 23:15
        +2

        If you were consistently making a 15-35% return on investment from the stock market people would be treating you like a rock star.

        Frankly, it sounds very much like squillions to me, when you put it like that.

        • localhost on 18/06/2024 - 23:24
          +1

          For developers anything below 200% is waste of time :)

          • netjock on 19/06/2024 - 13:38
            +1

            @localhost: Developers and tradies usually don't have a revenue problem. They have a spending problem.

            Saw like 3 dodge rams near a job site recently. These people have no sense when it comes to overheads and what actually drives unit costs.

            • localhost on 19/06/2024 - 14:26

              @netjock: Job site opposite our building - only 2 rams. What I am missing :)

              • netjock on 19/06/2024 - 15:51

                @localhost: Probably ran out of cash and behind with ATO.

                Most tradies don't understand even if you have the money you need to make $1 then ATO will forego 30c of tax you would otherwise have paid because you paid it to someone else and they are asking them for the 30c instead.

                Those rams are probably worth $300k if they put the difference between that and a bog standard Hilux into super.

            • CalmLemons on 20/06/2024 - 00:33

              @netjock: That's why every CFMEU member is going to get a new Ford Ranger/Raptor courtesy of the good people of NSW/government

      • greatlamp on 19/06/2024 - 23:12
        +1

        For context a McDonald's makes 25% ROI, a pharmacy makes 15% ROI.

        Those are the most stable retail businesses, restaurants can make a lot more but they can also go bust a lot more often.

        Developers have high costs, but the industry is not as risky as a fine dining restaurant, 15%-35% on 1.5 million makes you one of the most profitable businesses in the country. That's assuming you complete 1 job per year.

        I don't think you deserve to cry poor when you make more than a GP.

        • netjock on 20/06/2024 - 09:51

          People who run businesses have an unique mindset.

          I got a call the other day asking someone wants to buy a car on their business what is the limits. This is a $135k car not a ute.

          You can't get instant asset write off the whole amount
          Car limits are $68k (can't remember the exact amount) for depreciation
          You don't get GST back on LCT
          FBT (unless electric)

          https://www.ato.gov.au/businesses-and-organisations/gst-exci…

          Say 25% ROI you need to turn over half a million then pay all the cash out so you can save $45k in company tax that would otherwise be franking credits sitting on your account.

          The S&P500 is up 25% the last calendar year.

          Some people in business are unlucky, a lot just send themselves bust.

  • Tiredman on 18/06/2024 - 13:17
    +1

    Council is the biggest stumbling block. Took us a year to get our developments to approve on average. Then once it's done and ready for them to inspect and issue the statement of compliance, they start picking up random crap and ask you to change despite following their approved plans. Usually will be another few months wasted there. They not happy with the plant size, the garden bed, the fence, the leaves from trees, mulch color. I'm looking at you Manningham Council. Planners can go on month long holiday and no one takes over her job. So it took us 3.5 years on average from design stage to finish the entire job including sign off.

    • netjock on 19/06/2024 - 13:39
      +2

      Sounds like government efficiency. They get paid 80% of private sector salaries like closer to 20% of the output. I went through 4 town planners and took 12 months.

    • CalmLemons on 20/06/2024 - 00:36
      +1

      Think you caught an overzealous newby. They go on holiday a lot in whitehorse/manningham. Whitehorse set a record for us, 4 town planners over 1.5 years. They just kept on leaving.

      Edit: lol just saw netjocks post.

  • OhNoUShiz on 18/06/2024 - 18:23

    So who can buy these houses built by government?

  • OzzyOzbourne on 18/06/2024 - 19:12
    +2

    The government is going to give tax payer funded incentives to rich overseas investment businesses to build them. They'll either not build them and our money will be gone due to some loophole or they'll build them and find another loophole to profit massively in some way after receiving the subsidies from us, or they'll be so poorly built they'll be uninhabitable and we'll pay twice as much to fix them up or knock them down, then the rich foreign businesses investor will sell the land back to us for double the price.
    Tldr: it will be another tax payer funded government f'up

  • Willy Beamish on 19/06/2024 - 00:04
    +2

    Sick of all the dole bludgers living off the government tit their entire lazy ass lives. So many scumbags capable of working, so many losers popping out multiple kids by the time they are 20 being unmarried and complain the government doesn't pay them enough when they do nothing for the tens of thousands of dollars they get for doing nothing.

    Live in government provided housing
    Get rent assistance to live in that house
    Get dole money to not work
    Get "rebates" on your energy bills because youre a dole bludger
    Gets every other government assistance possible for being a drain on society

    Never pays a cent in tax to justify leeching off everyone.

    "Jobseeker" which is far from what the name suggests should be removed after 3 months so people cannot pretend to look for work.

    Aged pensioners are fine to a certain point, but immigrants coming over here to then live off the pension is disgusting considering they never contributed a thing. Dsp is too easy to get for certain people that are capable of working but then hide behind it their entire lives. Makes it harder for people that actually need it.

    • localhost on 19/06/2024 - 00:14
      +1

      Willy, you are right for most of the things. I think they should get all that if they want, but shouldn't be allowed to vote. Because there is no contribution to society and budget.

    • Wort on 19/06/2024 - 01:50
      +1

      You do know "they" pay tax - gst, fuel excise.

      • MrThing on 19/06/2024 - 02:16
        +1

        pay tax via gst using the money real tax payers give them indirectly via welfare?

    • MrThing on 19/06/2024 - 02:17
      +1

      unpopular opinion to some

      but I agree

    • netjock on 19/06/2024 - 13:36
      +1

      4% unemployment. It sounds like people who have legit issues which cannot get on the NDIS or other Centrelink benefits.

      Bigger problem is under employment where people can't get hours then there is people working 80hrs a week to just make ends meet.

      With 4% unemployment the government is adding 700k migrants in the last calendar year (2.1m over three years apparently).

      I am no conspiracy theorist but I think it is some kind of government scheme to get everyone's balls in a vice (not the type of vice that has happy endings).

      • greatlamp on 19/06/2024 - 23:19

        The unfortunate reality is there is no sinister scheme. They simply don't care enough to change the policy. It doesn't benefit the ALP to have record immigration as a talking point used against them, but they don't want to upset industry, and have been hoping the figures will drop off after the border reopening surge died down.

        The fact that the figures aren't dropping shows something has changed which they didn't expect. There must be a number of scam education facilities pumping out phantom places for international students - a scam well documentary to already have occurred in Canada.

        • netjock on 20/06/2024 - 09:56
          +1

          The unfortunate reality is there is no sinister scheme. They simply don't care enough to change the policy.

          Not caring is the sinister scheme.

          If average house price in Melbourne is near $1m. For anyone with 20% deposit it is a $800k loan minimum. How much family income you think would need to borrow that much money? Or if you are single income you are straight into highest tax bracket.

          By letting high costs run and not indexing tax brackets everyone will be on the top tax rate in 10 years. Also taking away your ability to save big amounts of money limits your options for social mobility and global mobility. Why would anyone sell their property to move if transaction costs are so high (you won't be able to afford an investment property at all) and if wages are so high in Australia why would you move to another country where life is better. While you are here rising costs take out all your money.

    • gfjh567gh3 on 19/06/2024 - 15:33

      Agreed. We need to stop the assumption that people in public housing are "just doing it tough/slipped through the cracks/want to work/just need a hand up and they'll be ok"
      There are many people that either lack the intellectual capacity to be productive members of society, or otherwise lack the motivation.
      Between the welfare state and NGOs, many can get by without being productive for a single day of their lives.
      Welfare promotes them staying alive and reproducing, but there is no balancing factor on the other end.

      Look at how many people in the Western world are a net-taxpayer and not a leech. Well over half are not tax positive, and that gets worse as you drill into other demographics.

      I live in a suburb with housos and it's infuriating that I pay so much tax, for them to be able to eat, copulate, and ride 2 stroke dirtbikes on the road.

      • greatlamp on 19/06/2024 - 23:30
        +1

        What is the solution? They don't have these issues in more authoritarian societies but that doesn't seem compatible with Australian culture

        Just cut them off? After 6 months no more jobseeker? We would have organised crime putting these people to work pretty quickly, noone else will hire them. You can visit Europe and see what it feels like to have gypsies and 'economic migrants' giving you death stares every time you go out to the shops.

        The long term unemployed are such a small % of our population it is actually cheaper to give them what they need.

        • netjock on 20/06/2024 - 09:58

          What is the solution?

          Help people making more money.

          But so far it is just lip service or those lucky enough that run a business that survives on NDIS. NDIS seems like the only low risk and high profit area other than if you are consulting firm that can give government rubbish advice then turn around and sell same advice to your private clients (like PWC).

        • gfjh567gh3 on 20/06/2024 - 11:52

          I suppose there's many ways to approach it, with varying levels of 'morality'!
          I agree that in many ways, it's more cost effective to just house them and pay the bill. However, the downsides to this are more than financial - not only is the quality of life of hardworking honest people reduced (read, dirtbikes on the street etc) but it actually demotivates and demoralises people. Why am I working so hard, to be so close to the poverty line, when these 80 iq people are living stressfree?

          It's the same with shop-lifting, honest people see this and think they're suckers for not engaging in the same behaviour. Non-shoplifters subsidise shoplifters in paying a higher cost for goods that is required to account for 'wastage' aka theft… and that doesn't even consider dropped service levels (items locked up, ugly stores, reduced inventory range).

          What strikes me is that welfare is paying for these people to not just stay alive, but procreate. We are therefore departing from 'survival of the fittest' and into eugenics territory. Therefore, it is not a great leap to say that if you are fully welfare supported, you should be sterilised. Obviously, I'd prefer to avoid playing God altogether, but like I said, the door has been opened by welfare.

          One thing is for certain - these people should not have the house inter-generationally; there should be tough income tests; and there is no reason that they should be in prime real estate. If you aren't working, you can be in Broken Hill. If you can't stay out of trouble, then we need to think about asylums and prison. It is demonstrably clear that putting low iq people in 'normal' suburbs DOES NOT uplift their behaviour.

          A nation cannot survive if only 25% of the population are net tax-payers.

  • jaimex2 on 19/06/2024 - 09:53

    It's just more trash in the dumpster fire that is Victoria really.

    No one in their right mind would invest in Victorian housing after the last budget changes. It's not going to even get to a "who do we get to build it" phase.

    • greatlamp on 19/06/2024 - 23:42

      Tenants rights aren't going to make the city a bad investment. New York has rent controls, real estate has always been expensive.

      If you can afford land, Melbourne is going to be the most profitable city in the country to invest in. The metropolitan area has reached its limits, planning overlays now require local councils to appove dogbox apartments up to 5 storeys. This will be the next London. Just don't buy an apartment for investment purposes.

      • jaimex2 on 20/06/2024 - 08:21

        Not talking about the tenant rights ( which are easy to bypass, they're a joke ). They've made it more expensive to invest in Victoria with stupid taxes.

        Why would anyone bother with Victoria when you can get both higher rent in the other states and you won't get fleeced by the state government each year?

        • Typical16-bitEnjoyer on 26/06/2024 - 07:32

          You've ironically discovered the entire point of the taxes

  • netjock on 19/06/2024 - 13:33

    Going to be fine.

    Land tax will drive people out of the state. Threshold is $50k, NSW is like $1m.

    That plus the budget black hole which is only growing and the fact that you can't get tradies because they are all on government infrastructure projects.

    How the government killed the economy by not leaving enough people to do private sector jobs that make tax revenue but spend tax payer money and borrow money (paying interest) to do government projects.

    How booms and busts happen is when government creates a bubble then it has to pop because it cannot maintain itself anymore.

  • bobolo on 19/06/2024 - 17:13
    +1

    More bandaid solutions from incompetent governments who don't want to rock the boat too much in fear of losing elections. More "housing policies" designed for people to find loopholes in and pump the market up even more. The only thing that will make any difference is if someone in charge has the balls to;

    1. reduce tax benefits via property
    2. reduce migration
    3. reduce red tape for development
    4. increase density in areas people actually want to live in

    Everything else is a waste of time. FWIW I am a heavy property investor (own 50+ properties) who has completely taken advantage of the Australian housing system to create a lot of wealth, and along the way realise what a joke it is for the average punter.

    • localhost on 20/06/2024 - 11:38

      Good or bad system is here. If you can build this portfolio (congratulations), what is stopping average punter to buy ONE property?
      I think the answer is simple - everyone wants 2-3 bedroom house, max 10km from CBD. For less than $600k because all the money went for something else…

  • RefusdClassification on 19/06/2024 - 19:18

    Maybe Albo will round up all the people who qualify for "Work for the Dole" and have them construct new housing 😂

    Unskilled and resentful people getting paid nothing for their work, what could go wrong?

    • greatlamp on 19/06/2024 - 23:53

      The Greens actually had a similar policy, except it mandated that they would be paid market rates. The idea behind it was that after their government job earning real money and gaining experience, they wouldn't want to go back to living on <$300 a week eating woolworths bulk value sausages and $1 bread.

    • smartazz104 on 20/06/2024 - 11:08

      Unskilled and resentful people getting paid nothing for their work, what could go wrong?

      As opposed to unskilled and resentful people getting paid a lot for their work…

  • Technics on 19/06/2024 - 20:16
    +2

    I don't understand the question.

    There's a war in the Middle East in the news so they announce a Middle East peace plan.
    The news says that science says that CO2 hurts mother nature so they announce a net zero target.
    There's a housing crisis in the news so they announce a housing target.

    The problems have been solved. What more do you want?

    • CalmLemons on 20/06/2024 - 00:39

      ROFL. I was about to ask whether this was satire then noticed the italics.

      Pure gold.

      I want Universal Basic Developer Income.

  • Ononono on 20/06/2024 - 00:54
    +1

    What we need is to import another 500,000 migrants yearly so that companies can continue posting record breaking profits, wage growth can remain stagnant, cost of living continues going up, and our investment properties can continue sky rocketing. Now, don't worry about those things just watch the footy and let's free palestine!

  • whitepuma on 20/06/2024 - 06:47

    They won't reach those targets (at least not with the number of tradies they have today; too much work, not enough workers). I feel the only way they can achieve close to that target is by really, and i mean #realy# push for tradies to come into the country via immigration via the SOL (skilled occupation list). I can't speak for quality in that area, i feel it all depends what precautions will be taken by gov to ensure quality and that they follow Australian building standards.

    Now realistically, they won't be able to fill that skill shortage in such a short amount of time, so what happens then? Well population will keep rising, and supply of housing won't be there. Property prices will continue to rise (and so will everything else), and eventually the price of property is going to be too high even for the people migrating to here, so then they will stop coming. If they can't afford a loaf of bread here, would they really move here? The outcome then is the ones that are already nested here are now stuck with unrealistic high prices for everything whilst people don't want to come here anymore.

    • smartazz104 on 20/06/2024 - 11:10

      Too bad that houses can only be built by humans.

      • whitepuma on 20/06/2024 - 12:25

        Not sure what your trying to say besides stating the obvious

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join