Opposition Wants Aussies To Pay For Home Deposits With Their Super
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 кві 2024
- The Opposition has been pushing to allow first-home buyers to withdraw their entire superannuation balance for a home deposit.
But will this scheme get more people into the housing market or just cost them thousands in retirement savings?
Opposition Housing Spokesman Andrew Bragg explains.
#CostOfLiving #Housing #Australia
Hallelujah!!!! The daily jesus devotional has been a huge part of my transformation, God is good 🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻🙌🏻was owning a loan of $47,000 to the bank for my son's brain surgery (David), Now I'm no longer in debt after I invested $8,000 and got my payout of m $270,500 every months,God bless Chloe Linda Henderson 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸..
Hello how do you make such monthly ?? I'm a born Christian and sometimes I feel so down 🤦 of myself because of low finance but I still believe in God.
Thanks to my co-worker (Alex) who suggested Ms Chloe Linda Henderson.
She's a licensed broker in the states 🇺🇸
After I raised up to 325k trading with her I bought a new House and a car here in the states 🇺🇸🇺🇸 also paid for my son's surgery (Oscar). Glory to God.shalom.
Wow that's nice She makes you that much!! please is there a way to reach her services, I work 3 jobs and trying to pay off my debts for a while now!! Please help me.
Anyone of these media commentators already owns multiple investment properties and air bandbs. Thats how they can talk about this so cheerfully
Or cut immigration, too much demand not enough supply
And BAN international investors from the Australian housing market, only permit Australian citizens to purchase Australian domestic housing, this will reduce demand and allow prices to stabilise.
thats just only one piece of the puzzle, its a multi faceted issues, immigration being one of them
No thank you, I like my IPs getting more equity.
@@wyattfamily8997yes u r right. Won’t happen unfortunately.
@@neild4620 your IPS will end up with 10+ bodies living in them. Good luck claiming insurance when they are inevitably destroyed
he is the biggest lunetic from liberal government he is losted
lol what?
Negative gearing is the elephant in the room.
Couldn’t agree more making first home buyers and renters trying to get into market suffer ,, competing with cashed up investors .so those with multiple properties can get a tax break …bizarre
Keep it but only if an investor builds a home. Have it as an incentive to build more houses and add to housing supply.
Scrap it for establishd homes.
Having politicians able to do negative gearing was a huge mistake since they now would never wanna address the issue while migration is increase
I own one house and rent it out. I live in my car for now with the plan to move back into my house when interests eventually drops and the payments are affordable.
The rent doesn't cover the insurance, mortgage, and rates. To cover all those I would have to increase the rent by 30-40%
Negative gearing keeps the rent affordable for my tenant. People out there are demonizing landlords instead of greedy bankers that make millions off the back of regular aussies and finance institutions that make millions off our super.
Negative gearing isn't the enemy
love or hate Labor ... you have to admire there attempt to reform the negative gearing tax rort.... they lost govt trying .. but they were PRINCIPLED
But BIG donors to the LNP who profit from this misery spent big in that campaign to undermine economic common sense
And the Green stuffed Labor campaign bu taunting engird workers in QLD who were just scared about their job.... all to get the money for the Green by winning another inner city seat
If they can access their super that will simply increase demand and therefore prices will go up
You missed him saying this needs to work in tandem with an increased supply of housing stock.
@@user-yf5cd2ep6y yeah that's a cop out and he knows it, supply isn't going to suddenly get turned on overnight even if miraculously any govt mobilized a large scale house building force they would never be ready in-time to work in tandem with this
@@Darkvern okay, so does that mean the 500,000 migrants each year Albo is bringing in will make things much worse and that none of those immigrants have skills we actually need to resolve the problem those very immigrants are contributing to?
@@user-yf5cd2ep6y well then it wont work, because no matrer what they try supply doesnt improve
Exactly, it will just benefit sellers, not buyers.
What a disaster this would be.
Ridiculous.This will only increase home prices,great news for 3 houses albo
Great news for essentially all the politicians mate haha on all sides of government
Hey all have multiple houses not just Albo ALL of them
Ministers in the liberal party have investments in age care … and who gets your house when you enter age care ??… they are looking after themselves not the public .
Make else in Real estate rich by robbing people of their super future. Just stop. WTAF
Okay, what are people going to live on when retirement comes around?
The pension, which is supposed to be paid for with the income taxes we pay.
@@kathyjova98 Only for those who don't have enough super. See the point? You really think people can live off the pension? Do you really think the government can guarantee the pension in a few decades? They are eroding our securities, doing this.
@@Blackheathenly People survived on the pension before super was invented.
@@kathyjova98 If the pension is still around in a few decades. Many developed countries are already raising the pension age because they can't afford it.
@@kathyjova98most people don’t pay enough income taxes to cover their government pension. That is a myth.
The government solves this problem by growing the population. The government imports young working age people. These people pay income taxes, so tax revenue grows. It’s like a Ponzi scheme.
When the government pension was first introduced in Australia, life expectancy was very different. The workforce was essentially split into manual labour and upper class.
* the upper class lived much longer, and could fund their own retirement
* the manual labour class would die much sooner. Sometimes even on the job. If they did live long enough to reach retirement, they didn’t live many years into retirement.
Now things are very different. Life expectancy has increased significantly. The retirement age hasn’t increased by the same amount. This means that people need the aged pension for many more years.
All the immigration to make this system work is one (of the many) reasons for the current housing crisis.
Great idea, it’s our bloody money, not the governments.
Except it doesn't solve the problem and insted screws you over for your retierment.
Are you 15?
You do realise that if everyone could access super, they would bid more at auctions. Negative gearers would bid more too.
All this higher bidding would help sellers. It wouldn’t help buyers.
And when these buyers retire without super, they’ll need government aged pension.
Politically the government wont be able to raise taxes, so the government will be forced to import workers. Yes immigration will increase government tax revenue, but it will also create more demand for housing.
Oh yeah, I'm sure
Greed and overseas investors have destroyed the lives of most Australians citizens and our governments have sold us all out
Ruin your present, destroy your retirement. Well done, Liberal Party!
Superannuation is one of the best policies ever implemented in Australia
Forced savings so the government doesn't have to give you a pension?
@@benjamingriswold2564idiot
Yep, especially if you make millions off the suckers forced to contribute.
Imagine being one of the peasants and having the audacity of wanting to own home and not having to pay rent when you are retired 😂
How are we forgetting that the property market is way out performing stocks and that a home is one of the most important factors for retirement sounds like a better investment then the crook super funds it’s not like the majority of people are self managing this
BAN non Australian citizens from the domestic housing market, reduced demand means lower prices. Introduce NetZero immigration. Around 80,000 people leave Australia each year so 80,000 are permitted entry, this would stabilise demand so in time we would have a sufficient supply.
So if house prices later fall and the super withdrawn goes underwater, then what happens?
what affear from lunetic liberal superanuation should not do this what i feel government should build more houses and not using your super
By the way, the economic theory is simple. All things being equal, Prices of anything will go up when demand exceed supply. To bring the prices down, increase the supply to meet the demand - problem solved.
Exactly. When I was a boy, the population of Australia was 10m. Today it's 26m. The cities are the same size they used to be, but there's a lot more people trying to cram into the same space, so naturally prices are going to go up. Fifty years from now the population will be 50m. What do people think will happen to prices then? Supply needs to increase by either more high rise or developing regional cities.
They always forget Hobart
The real reason house prices are ridiculous is because the government allowed self managed super funds to purchase property with much larger balances than the average punter can save for a deposit from wages.
So all these politicians and people with smsf's have caused this and no-one wants to talk about.
Is this kinda a joke? More money into the market means higher housing price...
It's simple. 1. Reduce Capital Gain's Tax. 2. Pay Mortguage assistance le same way they pay Rent assistance to Principle place ov Residence Mortguage holder's. 3. Close le Negative Gearing Loophole onllee allowing Negative Gearing on Principle Place ov Residence.
Tax reform is needed. That is the best way for people to use their own money. Cut wasteful government spending.
Tax reform isn’t only about taxing more/less.
Tax reform can reduce the inefficient use of land, materials and labour.
Tax reform can increase workforce participation.
Tax reform can incentivise investment in productivity (instead of just bidding up the price of land)
First page of economics textbook...increase demand side, do not increase supply, increase prices. Another excessively foolish housing policy after a long line of excessively foolish housing policies.
True. But having a foolish policy still gets them millions of votes. Who is the real fool here? A. Voters.
So many better ways…
* a vacancy tax strong enough to hit short term rentals eg AirBnB
* grandfather negative gearing and capital gains tax concessions
* phase out stamp duty in favour of a monthly land value tax
* transition the economy to not rely on population growth
* remove payroll tax
Why can't a strong rental payment history on time be enough to get a loan?
What about reducing migration.
Australia is essentially running a population growth Ponzi scheme. Australia imports additional tax payers to fund the aged pension and aged care.
When these immigrants retire, Australia imports more workers.
To move away from this cycle, Australia would need big changes eg
* decrease government spending
* increase taxes
* raise the retirement age
* have a government deficit (that puts upward pressure on inflation)
The government knows voters want less immigration. The tricky part is that voters don’t want the alternatives either.
It's their money they should be able to useit
Do they think we can't look after our own money
How arrogant
A real conversation needs to happen
Oh? Do go on.
It will add to the price
Solution, get rid of negatives gearing and plunge the revenue into building houses
No. It is not. This is the fallacy perpetuated by people who have no understanding or experience of how Negative gearing actually works in practice.
Regarding property prices, go talk to an experienced agent, operating in First Home Buyer suburbs.
They will tell you for a few years now, that property investors have exited the market.
FHB's have always been prepared to pay more for a home, whereas an Investor needs the business case ( price ) to stack up.
In recent years, high interest rates, huge increases in Land Tax, higher borrowing rates combined with even higher rates for investors and tougher lending criteria for investors, combined with Stamp Duty cuts and Buyer Grants for FHB's, have given. a very clear advantage to FHB's.
In the last 12 months, as one example, 1 in 4 property investors sold out of the housing market. So, despite all of this and the exiting of investors, what have we seen regarding rent and house prices?
We have seen increases.
That defeats your proposition with unambiguous evidence to the contrary.
The REAL reason for the cost of rents and house prices is the chronic imbalance of supply v demand. Yes, that old predicter.
We have a Federal Labor government allowing in record numbers of new migrants, over half a million a year, into a nation that already had an estimated short-fall of 1 million dwellings. And, at a time when we have a huge shortage of building industry tradespeople and record-high building costs, all leading to a big downturn in housing construction numbers.
By the way, despite Negative Gearing, property investors PAY FAR MORE back to governments in taxes than the benefits they receive and are, therefore, a tax-positive payer to government.
Problem is we f'd up in 2019 and voted for ScoMo meaning neither major party will touch negative gearing.
@@SormonAusPol Negative Gearing is not the problem and never has been. Only people who do not understand what NG does and does not do imagine that is the cause of the current housing crisis. You should review why it was that Labor's Bob Hawke and Paul Keating devised NG in the first place and why it is actually of benefit to the nation as a whole.
Negative gearing is like the tooth fairy for adults. It's a story that innocents are fed because the reality is too complex for them to understand. Negative gearing has very little influence on home prices, and the volume of deductions received by Australians is a tiny fraction of the numbers reported in the press. But this is not an audience that's wants to understand the topic, this is an audience that just wants to vent.
Why hasn't negative gearing caused a giant rise in the price of cars? Wouldn't is make sense to borrow and buy cars to rent-out? The cost would be tax deductible.
I didn't study economics at High School but I've picked up a few things over the years and any policy like this will definately increase house prices, increase demand and competition for the available locations. The government needs to provide incentives for more people to enter the construction trades. Obviously people will have less super returns in the future if they take out $50000 in their twenties or thirties, that's not ideal either. Perhaps if people can only access super early to pay for new build homes that add to the national housing stock that might help, but the LAND value would still increase prices because of demand and limited land availability for new housing developments.
We must BAN non Australian citizens (particularly international investors) from the domestic housing market, THAT is what continually adds to price increases. We then have a NetZero immigration policy for 5 years to enable housing stocks to catch up to local demand. Around 80,000 people leave Australian each year, 80,000 may enter.
Please bark up the right tree. Construction tradies are not causing the shortage. The shortage is in zoning - permission to build.
Property is another asset will increase over time, so in essence it can used towards a person's retirement.
This policy would be GREAT for me personally, but more money chasing fewer houses only has one outcome and it means that a slightly different group of Australians will be able to pull the ladder up behind them. People who have no super today will find it even harder to buy a home in the future if we allow this.
Makes more sense to use superannuation to pay off hecs so tax payers save money and ppl can borrow more. Also fix the hecs system.
That would probably lead to higher university fees
True and should have been done long time ago as who can afford an ever increasing housing prices these days…
Vastly reduce immigration as this is the biggest factor for Fs Sake.
This guy is a joke!
Or better yet get rid of super and let Aussies keep their money to spend how they want.. Which would probably be on a home deposit in the first place.
That's all well and good. Just don't expect an age pension ever.....
Demographic collapse incoming
As I commented to you earlier. A lot of young people need more savings discipline. Forced savings can be beneficial. Give up the smoking, drinking and gambling for starters!!
Great idea to help young people
It’s an idea to help sellers.
It won’t help buyers. Buyers will bid more thanks to their super funds. Negative gearers will also bid more. The end result is the house sells for a higher price.
The buyer gets the same thing at a higher price (so there’s less value for the buyer).
It's an option, it's not forced upon you. It's also much better than the shared equity scheme proposed by labor which sees you only gain say 60% of any improvements you pay on upgrading these homes. The other 40% goes straight to the govt for doing sweet **** all. Not a bad rort by Labors standards. SUPER is actually your own money. It's not the governments.
Maybe it is solution, because new migrants don’t have super yet, and migrants keep coming
It's international investment demand causing the problem. BAN non citizens from the housing market. THAT is the answer.
Why do governments import workers?
The reason is to collect more tax revenue. Voters essentially force the governments hand when voters say no to:
* large government spending cuts
* tax increases
* raising the retirement age
* government deficits (and the upward pressure on inflation they would cause)
The guy is a clown
I'd be happy if I could do that
Actually it's a smart move to do so, a house and land block is an asset that doesn't depreciate it grows and would over take the amount that someone would get from super, plus add to that, that a majority of millennials and younger generations won't be able to retire anyways why not spend a portion of your super on a place to live
"Making money out of the Housing Market is how we got into the problem in the first place". You just ignored the economist to copy a paste a script out of context.
@@Neojhunyou just ignored the reason was to to buy a place to live, he’s not talking about investment properties.
So what happens if someone drained all their superannuation and a couple separates during the period?
Defaults during the life of the loan term and used their superannuation?
They are then left homeless and no superannuation to fall back on in their retirement era.
If house is repaid in full and house is big enough would they mandate downsizing to live on own cash before falling back o to the pension?
The big elephant in the room is supply and demand for housing is so out of ratio which is pushing house prices up faster than what people are able to save and afford.
Instead of draining superannuation funds. How about government puts measures in place to make properties more affordable for the gen Z and millennials.
I have young children myself and know for a fact I will have to help them financially to get their deposits boosted or go guarantor if they are able to afford their mortgage.
Should Australia close off foreign investors buying up properties to free up properties?
Should there be a cap on AirBNB which have been turned from long term rentals to short term rentals?
There’s places which have been exposed as having been vacant for a long period of time.
There’s other avenues to explore than just draining entire superannuation as life can take a turn and could expose no cash or home if life does not go according to plan and we will create another problem in the long green by trying to put a temporary short term fix on the housing prices.
Normally the house/unit/apartment deprecates in value. It’s just the land that often increases in value.
Combined, yes the total value typically appreciates.
@@JamielDeAbrew that's not what we are seeingnin the market with a lack of building materials in Australia we are seeing houses and the land they are on appreciate
Cashed up billionaires and Boooooomers
The Labor party wants to use our Super funds to invest in build to rent apartment blocks. I much prefer to use my own super for a property than rent something back from my super fund.
It's an economically awful idea
That's not what Labor are proposing. Educate yourself
@@strikeforce448 Labour are all young global leaders from WEF Rent everything and be happy Read This has been in the pipworks for decades Covid was introduction
@balanced-shez8226 oh look, a "new world order" conspiracy theorists has entered the conversation. Correction the conspiracy has been around for decades. I'm still waiting for one of you cookers to explain how that'll actually be implemented.
Intelligent thought escapes you, doesn't it. Labor aren't proposing that you rent back an apartment bought with your superannuation, but don't let the facts get in the way of your misinformed comments
Great idea for those not in the market however this will just push up prices and inflation even further. We just purchased our first investment property in Brisbane using our Superannuation & a SMSF. We used $150k of our Super & borrowed $330k to purchase a 3-bedroom town house 20km from the city for $455k. It has since increased in value to $512k since Dec 2023 so I know where I'd rather have my money instead of the biggest scam in history the Superannuation industry.
Let’s be realistic, retirement age is now 70? With the cost of living rising we are forced to work 2-3 jobs just to get by with the basics, chances are most of us will not make it to retirement age anyway so let us use our superannuation. It’s our money anyway. I’ll be dammed if I live past 60.. I have always worked physically demanding jobs as I’m not cut out to sit behind a desk.
Where is the retirement age 70? 😂 67 max. Much earlier if you add to your own superannuation! The more superannuation the sooner you can retire, simple.
@@multioptionedit will be 70 before I get there!
@kelly78688 Hmm, unlikely. Governments have already tried to raise the age of "retirement" to 70yo and it was so unpopular it would cost them a future election. But by mandating superannuation, the idea is no workers will qualify for age pension anyway. There will be no age of retirement. People will retire when they think they have enough superannuation which will be more likely at or before around 60 or 65yo.
O god, reduce immigration down to the long term average and give every public servant and politition one million US dollars so they don't complain about thier negatively geared homes reducing in value.
This sounds ridiculous but I have done the maths and it will be cheaper for young people over 30 years if we do this. We can then rely on young people in thier own home to create population growth rather than import it from other countries with all the baggage attached to it.
Not all public servants are wealthy and have own their own home, let alone many. You are forgetting that teachers, nurses, zookeepers, public park workers, cleaners, maintenance people, anyone that works for a government department are also public servants. Why are you even talking in US dollars? And why can't your spell anything correctly? I guess you've done the math but not the English? Oh of course, because you were imported with all kinds of baggage attached like a poor education? Is that it? Ironic.
Yes
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Lol it won't push it up like inflation and interest rates already have, the housing market will always be up and down at different times so I don't see this having an effect especially when it'll be used for a deposit
How would massively increasing demand while not changing supply not cause housing prices to skyrocket?
Housing prices only go down during recession, supply exceeds demand, or other investments are more lucrative than property. When was the last time property prices dropped substantially in Australia? Must be due.
@@darrenbutler1765 the increase will happen once the government realises generations other then the boomers are willing to invest in their own furture by accessing their own super to do so which means less monetary access for the government.
3rd world wants to live here
Stopped their decided to deposits with their super on my personal private business company ..
Hahahaha.... that will just increase demand and push property prices even higher.
This is one of the most irisponsible things the liberal coalition have come up with. This shows just how out of touch the liberal coalition are. More affordable housing for first home buyers ONLY , needs to be built. Also first home buyers need to be more modest with their first purchase.
What rubbish it's their money !