Search

Nat Barr slammed for “out of touch” comments about the housing crisis

Nat Barr has been widely slammed online for her comments on the housing crisis, with many claiming she is “stirring the pot”. On Wednesday’s Sunrise show, Barr was just joined by two experts to discuss Labor’s Help To Buy Bill, which would allow Australians earning under $90,000 to buy a home with just a 2 per cent deposit. While discussing the legislation, Barr said she’s worried her two sons — aged 19 and 22 — won’t be able to purchase a home after finance spokesperson Jane Hume claimed “Australians have already rejected this policy right around the country”. “I’m in the lucky position that I got to buy mine when they were cheaper years ago but I don’t know how my kids are going to buy one,” Barr said. Barr, who has hosted Sunrise since 2020, has never spoken publicly about her salary, but it has long been speculated that she earns more than $1 million per year. Viewers were quick to slam her comments on Facebook, claiming Barr will “set her kids up”. “She is the last person who should speak. she’s wealthy and will set her kids up,” one person commented, while another added, “So many young people are buying houses every day without the help of mum and dad. Nat’s just stirring the pot.” Another commenter added, “She makes enough money to buy a house for each of her sons. They’ll be just fine. Check your privilege, Nat.” Image credits: Instagram / Sunrise

New calls for Boomers to end housing crisis

New research has called for Boomers to rent out their spare bedrooms in a bid to address the country's housing crisis. According to research from the Queensland University of Technology, there are more than 13 million spare bedrooms across the country, meaning 76 per cent of Aussie households have spare rooms. The report has called for older Australians to rent out their spare rooms to provide “short-term relief to both the rental and the cost of living crisis”. “If new housing stock is years away, then shifting the focus to existing housing may provide some short-term solutions,” the report states. The report also found that more than six million homes have one or two spare bedrooms, while one million homes have three or more spare bedrooms. They also encouraged the government to incentivise older Australians to open up their spare rooms to renters, to provide them some financial relief during the cost of living crisis. Currently, the Government hopes to build 1.2 million homes, but have welcomed further ideas to help relieve the cost of living crisis. “Meeting this ambitious target will certainly be a challenge and it won’t happen overnight, but it’s a challenge we have to meet in order to make housing more affordable," a government spokesman said. However, the Queensland University of Technology noted that the demand for housing is set to outstrip supply in Australia until at least 2029, based on the government's State of the Housing System report. “The housing crisis is a complex matter and new housing supply is years away, despite billions of dollars of government commitments,” the report states. “Millions of empty bedrooms exist and yet many older homeowners live in poverty rather than risk losing their pension or paying taxes by renting out a spare bedroom.” The report acknowledged that there may be barriers like concerns for elder abuse that may deter people from renting out their homes, "however, under the right circumstances, with appropriate support and education, such ‘house sharing’ arrangements could alleviate some of the current housing and cost of living issues." “There is an urgent need for further research to be undertaken to explore opportunities to incentivise, educate, support, and protect older Australians to open their homes and unlock existing housing stock for immediate use by those in need.” These findings follow PropTrack’s latest Housing Affordability Report that stated housing affordability in Australia has deteriorated to its “worst level on record” amid high mortgage rates and increasing home prices. Image: Shutterstock

Travel Trouble

"Stop the blame game": Kochie slams young Aussie homebuyers

David Koch has called on young Aussies to stop blaming baby boomers for their financial woes in his latest newsletter for finance website Compare The Market. The former Sunrise host and current economic director for the finance company said that young Aussies need to “stop the blame game” in regards to the housing crisis, arguing that baby boomers should be called the "scapegoats" instead. He explained that young homebuyers believe that his generation has “put them on the chopping block” despite the “Bank of Mum and Dad” sitting sixth largest home lenders. “Not enough houses? Boomers are hoarding them. Not enough home units? Boomers throw down cash before first-time buyers can say boo!” he wrote. He said that while he understood that young Aussies are struggling to buy a home, as the median price of one in Australia is currently 14 times the average annual income, in 1990 it was five times the average annual income. “When we bought our homes, prices were more accessible, and while interest rates were sky-high, our wages were aligned with housing costs.” “Housing markets have inflated, wages have stagnated, and opportunities for younger generations are considerably diminished.” He added that government policy is largely to blame for the dire housing situation, and that the rise in property costs was not because they wanted to hang younger Aussies out to dry, but because the economy favoured real estate as a safe, long-term investment. “Governments have simply not planned for either the generational housing change or the big increase in migration to ensure enough properties have been built to meet demand,” he wrote. He then referenced the State of the Housing System report which found that Australia will fall 40,000 units short of its 2029 new home construction target of 1.2m million. Kochie defended the boomers, saying that not many of them could be considered as the "wealthy, elite stereotype we often see in the news”, as many of them had to work hard to become a homeowner. “It's essential to recognise this diversity and avoid vilifying the entire generation,” he wrote. Kochie called on young Australians to "stop the blame game" and instead of "pointing fingers" they should focus on “how we can work together” to make housing affordable again. “A bit of compassion and creative thinking could go a long way. Otherwise, the scapegoats and sacrificial lambs of the world will continue their bleating,” he wrote. Images: Realestate.com.au

Money & Banking

Yomojo savings: A lifeline in the cost-of-living crisis

In the wake of Telstra announcing yet another increase in mobile rates, Yomojo stands out with its much more affordable options – and, having never raised their prices for existing customers, that makes them an excellent choice for anyone looking for a quality mobile service without the hefty price tag. So if you’re looking for a mobile phone plan that grows with your family and offers fantastic savings, <a href="https://yomojo.com.au/family/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Yomojo’s Family Bundles</a> offer the perfect solution. With these bundles, the more lines you add, the more you save! For example, adding two lines saves you 5%, while adding six lines saves you an impressive 15%. These discounted multi-line plans help reduce monthly expenses, ensuring that everyone in the family, including seniors, can stay connected without breaking the bank. By choosing Yomojo, families can manage their mobile costs more effectively, making a significant difference in their financial well-being during these challenging times. Yomojo also understands that every family is unique. That’s why they offer a range of Unlimited Plans that can be mixed and matched to suit each member’s needs and your budget. Whether you need 8GB or 100GB of data, Yomojo has you covered with plans starting as low as $19.90. Managing your family’s mobile services has never been easier. Yomojo provides a simple, secure, and easy-to-manage family dashboard where you can oversee all plan details through a single interface. Plus, with no lock-in contracts, you can freely customise your plans every month to adapt to your changing needs. Yomojo also offers proactive plan management to help you avoid bill shock, convenient plan renewals every 30 days, and easy top-ups to boost your mobile credit or data allocation as needed. Their exceptional customer service and reliable coverage make Yomojo a top choice for families across Australia. You can also “spread the love” for further savings with Yomojo’s simple and rewarding <a href="https://yomojo.com.au/mgm" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Referral Program</a>. Simply invite friends and family to join Yomojo, and both of you will receive a $20 credit when they activate their new SIM card. This is a win-win situation where you can refer as many people as you like, and watch your credits roll in! It’s a fantastic way to share Yomojo’s great service while enjoying additional savings on your own plan. But don’t just take our word for it – Yomojo customers have been raving about the great value, flexible plans and outstanding customer service. “By far the best value mobile plans out there,” wrote Stevo on ProductReview.com.au. “My wife and I both have accounts with them. Spoke to customer service and had my query dealt with quickly and effectively. Would recommend this company.” “I am a long-term Telstra customer who has never changed networks until now,” wrote Kerryn on Facebook Reviews. “The ever-rising charges I was receiving from Telstra promoted my change. My changeover experience has been very smooth. There was a lot of communication from Yomojo, both via sms and email, updating me with the progress of my sim card, activation and porting from Telstra.” “Definitely best value for money plan out there,” wrote Cam on Google Reviews. “Optus coverage has been very reliable as well. Excellent customer service and fast number porting.” So why not join the Yomojo family today and experience the freedom, flexibility and savings that come with their Family Bundles! For more information, visit <a href="https://yomojo.com.au/family/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Yomojo Family Bundles</a>. Image: Shutterstock This is a sponsored article produced in partnership with Yomojo.

Money & Banking

Is nuclear the answer to Australia’s climate crisis?

<div class="theconversation-article-body"><a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/reuben-finighan-157147">Reuben Finighan</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> In Australia’s race to net zero emissions, nuclear power has surged back into the news. Opposition leader Peter Dutton <a href="https://ipa.org.au/research/climate-change-and-energy/peter-dutton-address-to-ipa-members-sydney-7-july-2023">argues</a> nuclear is “the only feasible and proven technology” for cutting emissions. Energy Minister Chris Bowen insists Mr Dutton is promoting “<a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-18/energy-minister-says-nuclear-power-too-expensive/102868218">the most expensive form of energy</a>”. Is nuclear a pragmatic and wise choice blocked by ideologues? Or is Mr Bowen right that promoting nuclear power is about as sensible as <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/radionational-breakfast/-unicorn-and-a-fantasy-energy-minister-slams-nuclear-energy/102866944">chasing “unicorns”</a>? For someone who has not kept up with developments in nuclear energy, its prospects may seem to hinge on safety. Yet by any hard-nosed accounting, the risks from modern nuclear plants are orders of magnitude lower than those of fossil fuels. Deep failures in design and operational incompetence caused the Chernobyl disaster. Nobody died at Three Mile Island or from Fukushima. Meanwhile, a Harvard-led study found <a href="https://seas.harvard.edu/news/2021/02/deaths-fossil-fuel-emissions-higher-previously-thought">more than one in six deaths globally</a> – around 9 million a year – are attributable to polluted air from fossil combustion. Two more mundane factors help to explain why nuclear power has halved as a share of global electricity production since the 1990s. They are time and money. <h2>The might of Wright’s law</h2> There are four arguments against investment in nuclear power: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olkiluoto_Nuclear_Power_Plant">Olkiluoto 3</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flamanville_Nuclear_Power_Plant#Unit_3">Flamanville 3</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinkley_Point_C_nuclear_power_station">Hinkley Point C</a>, and <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vogtle_Electric_Generating_Plant">Vogtle</a>. These are the four major latest-generation plants completed or near completion in Finland, the United States, the United Kingdom and France respectively. Cost overruns at these recent plants average over 300%, with more increases to come. The cost of Vogtle, for example, soared from US$14 billion to $34 billion (A$22-53 billion), Flamanville from €3.3 billion to €19 billion (A$5-31 billion), and <a href="https://illuminem.com/illuminemvoices/nuclear-economics-lessons-from-lazard-to-hinkley-point-c">Hinkley Point C</a> from £16 billion to as much as £70 billion (A$30-132 billion), including subsidies. Completion of Vogtle <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/vogtles-troubles-bring-us-nuclear-challenge-into-focus-2023-08-24/">has been delayed</a> by seven years, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/after-18-years-europes-largest-nuclear-reactor-start-regular-output-sunday-2023-04-15/">Olkiluoto</a> by 14 years, and <a href="https://www.nucnet.org/news/decree-sets-startup-deadline-of-2024-4-3-2020">Flamanville</a> by at least 12 years. A fifth case is <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgil_C._Summer_Nuclear_Generating_Station">Virgil C</a>, also in the US, for which US$9 billion (A$14 billion) was spent before cost overruns led the project to be abandoned. All three firms building these five plants – Westinghouse, EDF, and AREVA – went bankrupt or were nationalised. Consumers, companies and taxpayers <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/07/18/hinkley-points-cost-consumers-surges-50bn/">will bear the costs</a> for decades. By contrast, average cost overruns for wind and solar are <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/we.2069">around zero</a>, the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S2214629614000942">lowest</a> of all energy infrastructure. <a href="https://ark-invest.com/wrights-law/">Wright’s law</a> states the more a technology is produced, the more its costs decline. Wind and especially solar power and <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/battery-price-decline">lithium-ion batteries</a> have all experienced <a href="https://www.irena.org/News/pressreleases/2023/Aug/Renewables-Competitiveness-Accelerates-Despite-Cost-Inflation">astonishing cost declines</a> over the last two decades. For nuclear power, though, Wright’s law has been inverted. The more capacity installed, the more costs have increased. Why? This <a href="https://www.cell.com/joule/pdf/S2542-4351(20)30458-X.pdf">2020 MIT study</a> found that safety improvements accounted for around 30% of nuclear cost increases, but the lion’s share was due to persistent flaws in management, design, and supply chains. In Australia, such costs and delays would ensure that we miss our emissions reduction targets. They would also mean spiralling electricity costs, as the grid waited for generation capacity that did not come. For fossil fuel firms and their political friends, this is the real attraction of nuclear – another decade or two of sales at inflated prices. <h2>Comparing the cost of nuclear and renewables</h2> Nevertheless, nuclear advocates tell us we have no choice: wind and solar power are intermittent power sources, and the cost of making them reliable is too high. But let’s compare the cost of reliably delivering a megawatt hour of electricity to the grid from nuclear versus wind and solar. According to both <a href="https://publications.csiro.au/rpr/download?pid=csiro:EP2022-5511&dsid=DS1">the CSIRO</a> and respected energy market analyst <a href="https://www.lazard.com/media/typdgxmm/lazards-lcoeplus-april-2023.pdf">Lazard Ltd</a>, nuclear power has a cost of A$220 to $350 per megawatt hour produced. Without subsidies or state finance, the four plants cited above generally hit or exceed the high end of this range. By contrast, Australia is already building wind and solar plants at under <a href="https://reneweconomy.com.au/act-starts-to-bank-its-cheapest-wind-power-yet-in-next-stage-to-kick-out-fossil-fuels/">$45</a> and <a href="https://reneweconomy.com.au/nsw-gets-stunning-low-price-for-wind-and-solar-in-biggest-renewables-auction/">$35 per megawatt hour</a> respectively. That’s a tenth of the cost of nuclear. The CSIRO has <a href="https://www.csiro.au/-/media/EF/Files/GenCost/GenCost2022-23Final_27-06-2023.pdf">modelled the cost</a> of renewable energy that is firmed – meaning made reliable, mainly via batteries and other storage technologies. It found the necessary transmission lines and storage would add only $25 to $34 per megawatt hour. In short, a reliable megawatt hour from renewables costs around a fifth of one from a nuclear plant. We could build a renewables grid large enough to meet demand twice over, and still pay less than half the cost of nuclear. <h2>The future of nuclear: small modular reactors?</h2> Proponents of nuclear power pin their hopes on <a href="https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/what-are-small-modular-reactors-smrs#:%7E:text=Small%20modular%20reactors%20(SMRs)%20are,of%20traditional%20nuclear%20power%20reactors.">small modular reactors</a> (SMRs), which replace huge gigawatt-scale units with small units that offer the possibility of being produced at scale. This might allow nuclear to finally harness Wright’s law. Yet commercial SMRs are years from deployment. The US firm <a href="https://www.nuscalepower.com/en">NuScale</a>, scheduled to build two plants in Idaho by 2030, has not yet broken ground, and on-paper costs have already <a href="https://ieefa.org/resources/eye-popping-new-cost-estimates-released-nuscale-small-modular-reactor">ballooned</a> to around A$189 per megawatt hour. And SMRs are decades away from broad deployment. If early examples work well, in the 2030s there will be a round of early SMRs in the US and European countries that have existing nuclear skills and supply chains. If that goes well, we may see a serious rollout from the 2040s onwards. In these same decades, solar, wind, and storage will still be descending the Wright’s law cost curve. Last year the Morrison government was spruiking the goal of getting solar below <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/ultra-low-cost-solar-power-a-priority-for-australia-20220108-p59msj.html">$15 per megawatt hour by 2030</a>. SMRs must achieve improbable cost reductions to compete. Finally, SMRs may be necessary and competitive in countries with poor renewable energy resources. But Australia has the richest combined solar and wind resources in the world. <h2>Should we lift the ban?</h2> Given these realities, should Australia lift its ban on nuclear power? A repeal would have no practical effect on what happens in electricity markets, but it might have political effects. A future leader might seek short-term advantage by offering enormous subsidies for nuclear plants. The true costs would arrive years after such a leader had left office. That would be tragic for Australia. With our unmatched solar and wind resources, we have the chance to deliver among the cheapest electricity in the developed world. Mr Dutton may be right that the ban on nuclear is unnecessary. But in terms of getting to net zero as quickly and cheaply as possible, Mr Bowen has the relevant argument. To echo one assessment from the UK, nuclear for Australia would be “<a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2013-10-30/u-k-risks-looking-economically-insane-with-edf-nuclear-deal">economically insane</a>”.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/216891/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/reuben-finighan-157147">Reuben Finighan</a>, PhD candidate at the LSE and Research Fellow at the Superpower Institute, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/the-university-of-melbourne-722">The University of Melbourne</a> Image credits: Shutterstock This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-nuclear-the-answer-to-australias-climate-crisis-216891">original article</a>. </div>

Domestic Travel

Cafe providing free meals to families faces shutdown

Kirsty Parkes spends a lot of her time providing food and clothes to those in need amid the cost-of-living crisis by running a community cafe. But now, her beloved cafe may close if she doesn't receive urgent financial help. "We need to pay our bills in order to keep this going and if we don't pay our bills, people don't eat," Parkes, who has a big family of her own, told A Current Affair. Community Cafe in Sydney's south-west became a safe haven for dozens of men, women and children, with over 100 people showing up every day. The cafe is a place where people can get food, clothes and toiletries for free, as well as connect with others. "We want to help people restore their value and restore their dignity," Parkes said. "Our currency is just a little bit different. So instead of using money, we use manners. Because manners and kindness are free." However, with an increase in costs and a lack of donations, the beloved cafe may soon be forced to close. "Whether there's a rate rise, whether there's a petrol hike, all of these little things affect us tremendously and affect the numbers here," she said. "We need to come up with some funds really desperately before then just to keep us open," she added. She said that at this stage they require "around about $20,000. Our electricity bill alone is almost $10,000." She added that Cabravale Diggers, who have been paying the cafe's rent, and Liverpool City Council, who have also been providing financial assistance, can't continue to hold responsibility for all of the bills. "We've had fantastic sponsorship, we have fantastic people that back us ... but they can't carry the burden of this," Parkes said. "This is something that the whole community needs to get behind and support." The cafe provides invaluable support for customers like Ted and Lola, who find it hard to find a similar community. "I go to church. Not even a church will help me," Lola said. "These people - I don't even know them and out of nowhere they're taking rich and poor, whoever turns up." "It's hard living on a pension. It's very hard," Ted added. Parkes added that as things are starting to run out, she has had to impose rations, which has been difficult for her. "We've had to then turn around and say 'look today, sorry we can only give you two loaves of bread because we just don't have enough for everyone that's going to come through the door'," Parkes said. "That stuff breaks my heart. It absolutely kills me because people are hungry." From Friday, customers may have to be turned away. "It's terrible. How can we close? We see over 120 people a day. It's terrible," one of the volunteers at the community cafe said. "The community needs it. We can't close. We absolutely cannot close." Those who would like to help the cafe stay open have been encouraged to visit their <a href="https://www.facebook.com/Communitycafe.inc" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Facebook page</a>. Image: A Current Affair

Caring

"Rentirement": Bold new proposition for housing crisis

Aussies over 67 are being urged to rent out their homes and retire overseas in a bold new housing proposition floated by Suburbtrends. The property sector market researchers said that “rentirement” is a viable solution to the nation’s current housing crisis, as it would open up over 137,000 homes. Suburbtrends founder Kent Lardner said that current attempts of easing rental stress is not adequate enough. “While increasing housing supply is essential, it simply won’t come fast enough to address the immediate needs of renters.” Rentirement encourages those aged 67 to 77 to release their homes into the rental pool, and retire overseas, with Southeast Asia proposed as an ideal destination due to its significantly lower cost of living. “Our data shows that over 137,000 homes could be released into the rental market if just 10 per cent of the Rentirees cohort participated,” he said. “This represents a substantial untapped resource that could drastically ease rental pressures.” The initiative would offer a five-year moratorium on the loss of the primary place of residence benefit, which they believe this would be a “win-win” situation retirees, renters, and the government, as it could help provide more housing options. “Rentirees can enjoy a higher quality of life at a fraction of the cost, renters gain access to more housing, and the government can alleviate pressure on the housing market without significant expenditure,” he said. Lardner added that “rentirement” would lead to an immediate influx of rental properties, stabilising prices and reducing vacancy rates. “We believe rentirement offers a practical and timely solution to Australia’s rental crisis,” he said. “It’s time to think outside the box and explore every avenue to ensure a stable, affordable housing market for all Australians.” This comes after PropTrack reported that there has been a drastic reduction in affordable rental homes, with the amount of rental properties costing less than $400 a week plummeting from 43.2 per cent at the start of the pandemic to just 10.4 per cent now. Image: Steve Tritton/ Shutterstock

Money & Banking

Dad forced to live in tent amid housing crisis

An Aussie dad is the latest to fall victim to the housing crisis, with soaring rent and low vacancy rates forcing him to live in a tent. Peter Woodforde, 58, has been forced to live makeshift gazebo wrapped in tarps that's set up in an Adelaide park, and while his children know that he is doing it tough, they don't know that he is homeless and living in a tent. The father has yet to tell his kids, who live with their mother, that he's unable to find a suitable place to live as he said that they would be distraught if they found out. He admitted his 15-year-old daughter once told him that it "hurt her" to know her dad was struggling to find a comfortable place to live - but she doesn't know the extent of it. Speaking to 7News, Woodforde said it's been difficult not being able to offer his kids a place to sleep. “Every parent wants to give their kids everything they possibly can and wants to give them the best chance of having a good life,” he told the publication. “What I say to them is that this is only temporary, Dad will get back on his feet. “(But) you’re missing out on some golden years ... I help where I can, I might pick them up and drop them off from school, but now they’re too far for me to do that,” he added. "I have to get myself off the street. I have to get my family into a house." Woodforde is sharing his story because he believes that homelessness is in a “state of emergency”, especially with winter approaching. He is also unsure about whether his makeshift tent will collapse when heavier rain hits, and hopes that more could be done to help these people facing desperate circumstances. “We’re coming into the colder months - what’s the bill going to be for all the health problems that are going to arise out of this?" he said. Images: 7News

Money & Banking

Channel 10 axes another show amid ratings crisis

Channel 10 has decided to axe yet another popular show as they continue to grapple with declining ratings and viewers leaving. Following the cancellation of The Bachelors and The Masked Singer, <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-13449749/Channel-10-axes-amid-ratings-crisis-revealed-Channel-Seven-considering-saving-unlikely-series.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Daily Mail Australia</a> reported that the network was also cancelling Gladiators. Despite the show's success in the UK, the Australian reboot struggled to find the same effect as they failed to sustain their initial viewership. The show produced by Warner Bros and hosted by Beau Ryan and Liz Ellis was launched with high hopes and attracted 395,000 metro viewers during its premiere. However, by the second episode the numbers plummeted to just 196,000 - over half of the initial viewership. Critics on social media were also quick to point out the lack of crowd presence, despite the show being filmed under normal conditions, with one person saying: "It felt like watching an event without any real energy." The Traitors is another the show that was axed by the network after just two seasons, and now an insider has revealed that Channel Seven is considering commissioning the series. "The show's concept has potential, but it needs a fresh approach and a new platform," the insider told Daily Mail Australia. They also shared what's in store for Channel 10 as they attempt to revive their ratings. "Channel 10 is now deciding to put all their eggs in one basket, planning to roll out not one, but two seasons of Australian Survivor in 2025," the insider said. "They are putting together a 10th season special as well as an Australia vs USA Survivor all-star showdown which will be screened simultaneously in America and Down Under." A Channel 10 executive said: "Survivor has consistently performed well for us, and we believe this new approach will reignite audience interest." The Daily Mail reported that they have contacted Channel Seven and 10 for a comment. Image: Ten

“Greedy” landlord slammed for illegal act

A Victorian landlord has been slammed on social media after admitting to making her tenants pay an illegal pet bond amounting to $1000. The woman made the admission while replying to a post on a Facebook group for Victorian landlords after a member asked for advice about renting to tenants who have pets. "Not knowing everything but in my experience I would rather have pets than kids!" the landlord began. "I would ask for a pet bond. I have one it's $1000 for damages by the pet," she said Pet bonds are illegal in Victoria, and landlords who try to secure it illegally often describe it as a way to cover costs if their pet causes any damages to the property. When the poster replied saying that her tenant offered to provide a pet bond, but she knows they're not legal in Victoria, the landlord confessed that: "I know they are not legal but I always ask for them and my PM (property manager) has been great about them.” “I have lots of pets personally and don’t turn down animals. Again, kids have done more damage than animals in my experience,” she added. “Most renters are happy to do it as it means they can have animals.” In Victoria renters who want a pet on the property must ask the rental provider, and if they refuse the request, the landlord must provide a valid excuse, with assistance dogs being the exception. If a pet causes damages to a property, the cost of these damages can be taken out of the regular bond paid at the start of their tenancy, so a pet bond is not required. Western Australia is the only state where landlords can legally ask for a pet bond, but even then they can only charge a maximum of $260 regardless of how many pets there are. A screenshot of the landlords shocking admission was shared on X by by popular renter’s advocate, Jordie van den Berg with the caption: “Landlord: ‘yeah I know it’s not legal, but I do it anyway’." Outraged renters slammed the landlord's “greedy” and “vile” behaviour, with one calling it “emotional blackmail”. “‘Most renters are happy to pay’ – I’m sure none of them are happy but they need somewhere to live without having to give up their pet," one wrote. “I personally would not describe myself as ‘happy’ to be exploited over an illegal bond that I can’t dispute when you go ahead and invent some bulls**t to keep it because the alternative is that it’s almost impossible to get a rental with pets,” another added. “The most concerning thing is the manager, how many illegal bonds have they taken and where is the money being held? In the agents account, with the owner? It wouldn’t be with fair trading where legal bonds are lodged,” a third wrote. This comes after a recent Rental Affordability report shared by Anglicare Australia revealed that “the housing crisis is the worst it’s ever been." According to the report only 0.6 per cent out of 45,000 listings across the country were considered affordable for a person earning a full-time minimum wage. Image: Jordie Berg/ X/ Shutterstock

Legal

Our housing system is broken and the poorest Australians are being hardest hit

<div class="theconversation-article-body"> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rachel-ong-viforj-113482">Rachel Ong ViforJ</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/curtin-university-873">Curtin University</a> Just when we think the price of rentals could not get any worse, this week’s <a href="https://www.anglicare.asn.au/publications/2023-rental-affordability-snapshot/">Rental Affordability Snapshot</a> by Anglicare has revealed low-income Australians are facing a housing crisis like never before. In fact, if you rely on the <a href="https://www.servicesaustralia.gov.au/youth-allowance">Youth Allowance</a>, there is not a single rental property across Australia you can afford this week. <h2>How did rental affordability get this bad?</h2> Several post-COVID factors have been blamed, including our preference for <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2023/jun/new-insights-into-the-rental-market.html">more space, the return of international migrants</a>, and <a href="https://www.corelogic.com.au/news-research/news/2023/could-the-peak-in-interest-rates-signal-an-end-to-rising-rents">rising interest rates</a>. However, the rental affordability crisis pre-dates COVID. Affordability has been steadily declining for decades, as successive governments have failed to make shelter more affordable for low-to-moderate income Australians. <h2>The market is getting squeezed at both ends</h2> At the lower end of the rental sector, the growth in the supply of social housing persistently lags behind demand, trending at under <a href="https://povertyandinequality.acoss.org.au/data/annual-growth-rates-social-housing-stock-and-population-2011-2020/">one-third</a> the rate of population growth. <hr /> <iframe id="OA0cS" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/OA0cS/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> This has forced growing numbers of low-income Australians to seek shelter in the private rental sector, where they face intense competition from higher-income renters. At the upper end, more and more aspiring home buyers are getting <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03085147.2021.2003086">locked out</a> of home ownership. A recent <a href="https://www.ahuri.edu.au/sites/default/files/documents/2024-02/AHURI-Final-Report-416-Affordable-private-rental-supply-and-demand-short-term-disruption.pdf">study</a> found more households with higher incomes are now renting. Households earning <a href="https://www.ahuri.edu.au/sites/default/files/documents/2024-02/AHURI-Final-Report-416-Affordable-private-rental-supply-and-demand-short-term-disruption.pdf">$140,000</a> a year or more (in 2021 dollars) accounted for just 8% of private renters in 1996. By 2021, this tripled to 24%. No doubt, this crowds out lower-income households who are now facing a shortage of affordable homes to rent. <h2>Why current policies are not working</h2> Worsening affordability in the private rental sector highlights a housing system that is broken. Current policies just aren’t working. While current policies focus on supply, more work is needed including fixing <a href="https://theconversation.com/governments-are-pouring-money-into-housing-but-materials-land-and-labour-are-still-in-short-supply-205471">labour shortages</a> and providing greater <a href="https://theconversation.com/people-want-and-need-more-housing-choice-its-about-time-governments-stood-up-to-deliver-it-122390">stock diversity</a>. The planning system plays a critical role and <a href="https://theconversation.com/confusing-and-not-delivering-enough-developers-and-councils-want-new-affordable-housing-rules-139762">zoning rules</a> can be reformed to support the supply of more affordable options. However, the housing affordability challenge is not solely a supply problem. There is also a need to respond to the <a href="https://theconversation.com/home-prices-are-climbing-alright-but-not-for-the-reason-you-might-think-158776">super-charged demand</a> in the property market. An overheated market will undoubtedly place intense pressure on the rental sector because aspiring first home buyers are forced to rent for longer, as house prices soar at a rate unmatched by their wages. Yet, governments continue to resist calls for winding back the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-02-15/ken-henry-australias-tax-system-in-worse-position-after-15-years/103465044">generous tax concessions</a> enjoyed by multi-property owners. The main help available to low-income private renters - the Commonwealth Rent Assistance scheme - is <a href="https://theconversation.com/1-billion-per-year-or-less-could-halve-rental-housing-stress-146397">poorly targeted</a> with nearly one in five low-income renters who are in rental stress deemed ineligible, while another one in four receive it despite not being in rental stress. <h2>Can affordable housing occur naturally?</h2> Some commentators support the theory of <a href="https://www.ahuri.edu.au/sites/default/files/documents/2022-09/Executive-Summary-FR387-Filtering-as-a-source-of-low-income-housing-in-Australia-conceptualisation-and-testing.pdf">filtering</a> - a market-based process by which the supply of new dwellings in more expensive segments creates additional supply of dwellings for low-income households as high-income earners vacate their former dwellings. Proponents of filtering argue building more housing anywhere - even in wealthier ends of the property market - will eventually improve affordability across the board because lower priced housing will trickle down to the poorest households. However, the persistent affordability crisis low-income households face and the rise in homelessness are crucial signs filtering <a href="https://cloud.3dissue.com/122325/122578/143598/WhyNewSupplyisnotExpandingHousingOptionsfortheHomeless/html5/index.html?page=1&noflash">does not work well</a> and <a href="https://www.ahuri.edu.au/sites/default/files/documents/2022-09/AHURI-Final-Report-387-Filtering-as-a-source-of-low-income-housing-in-Australia-conceptualisation-and-testing.pdf">cannot be relied upon</a> to produce lower cost housing. <h2>Location, location, location</h2> Location does matter, if we expect building new housing to work for low-income individuals. What is needed is a steady increase of affordable, quality housing in areas offering low-income renters the same access to jobs and amenities as higher-income households. The <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/housing-policy/accord#:%7E:text=The%20Accord%20includes%20an%20initial,5%20years%20from%20mid%E2%80%912024.">National Housing Accord</a> aims to deliver 1.2 million new dwellings over five years from mid-2024. But it must ensure these are “well-located” for people who need affordable housing, as suggested in the accord. Recent <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02673037.2023.229051">modelling</a> shows unaffordable housing and poor neighbourhoods both negatively affect mental health, reinforcing the need to provide both affordable and well-located housing. <h2>The upcoming budget</h2> While the <a href="https://www.dss.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/05_2023/payments-cra_budget_fact_sheet_fa_0.pdf">15% increase</a> in the maximum rent assistance rate was welcomed in the last budget, the program is long overdue for a major restructure to target those in rental stress. Also, tax concessions on second properties should be wound back to reduce competition for those struggling to buy their first home. This would eventually help ease affordability pressures on low-income renters as more higher-income renters <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/1467-8454.12335">shift into homeownership</a>. The potential negative impacts on rental supply can be mitigated by careful design of tax and other changes that guard against market destabilisation concerns. Overall, housing affordability solutions have to be multi-faceted. The housing system is badly broken and meaningful repair cannot be achieved unless policymakers are willing to confront both supply and demand challenges.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/228511/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rachel-ong-viforj-113482">Rachel Ong ViforJ</a>, ARC Future Fellow & Professor of Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/curtin-university-873">Curtin University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/our-housing-system-is-broken-and-the-poorest-australians-are-being-hardest-hit-228511">original article</a>. </div>

Money & Banking

Family of eight forced to live in tent amid rental crisis

A family of eight have been forced to live in a tent for over six months as they wait to find suitable accommodation after their last rental lease ended. Cameron and Tameka Fletcher and their six children, aged between one and 10, have been living in a tent and have had to move from campsite to campsite since September. The couple claimed that the government can't support them because they have "too many children", and are waiting for public housing, but they might not meet the criteria to be eligible for it. They were reportedly staying in a makeshift tent city in a suburban park north of Brisbane. "We've always had a house, we've never done this," Cameron Fletcher told Nine News. "Everyone here is going through the same thing. But it's the only way to get help." “We can only do what’s best for our kids, to keep a roof over their heads,” his wife added. One of the couple's daughters is due to start school next year, and they have been struggling to enrol her as the family doesn't have a permanent address. The family said they are also struggling with day-to-day activities like finding breakfast, washing their clothes and getting the kids ready for school, and are using solar camping showers purchased from Kmart to clean themselves. According to Nine News, the family would be happy with a three-bedroom home but were told by state housing officials that they can only be offered a five-bedroom home to avoid overcrowding, but there are currently none available. In a statement issued to Yahoo News, a spokesperson for Department of Housing said it “has been working with the family since September last year, including providing accommodation which they chose to leave”. "As we’ve been assisting them to find longer-term options, they have declined further offers of accommodation," the spokesperson said. "With regards to social housing, there are eligibility factors that need to be met, including income thresholds. However, the department continues to work with the family to find a private rental and give any other support they might need." This comes as new <a href="https://www.news.com.au/finance/real-estate/rent-shock-what-youll-be-paying-in-every-australian-suburb-in-2024/news-story/10b67da9ebe170a2e2d37caa7e66bf40" target="_blank" rel="noopener">PropTrack</a> data, released in March, revealed that rent has increased by 17 per cent over the past 12 months, across all the capital cities in Australia. More than half of Queenslanders who have applied for social housing are reportedly homeless and have had to wait for over two years amid a lack of supply and increased demands. Earlier this year, the Queensland government announced it was aiming to build another 53,500 social homes by 2046, with a $3.1 billion funding boost to deliver one million homes. Images: Nine News

Money & Banking

"Out-of-touch" Project stars slammed over clash with renter advocate

Social media users have slammed The Project hosts, following their recent interview with a renter advocate who encourages Aussies struggling with the housing crisis to squat in empty homes. Jordan van den Berg, founder of the S*** Rentals website shared a video over the weekend outside a rundown house in Chadstone, Melbourne, saying: “Are you sick of rich people hoarding empty houses during a housing crisis? I know I am." “Here’s how you can do something about it.” He then encouraged people to submit information on empty homes in their suburbs via a form on his website, which he plans to promote on his socials so those struggling to find a home could squat in them. “Fun fact – squatting in Australia is not necessarily illegal, which is the best type of legal, especially if the front door doesn’t actually lock," he said. On Monday, he appeared on The Project to talk about his controversial plans, and was grilled by the show's hosts. “I know we’re in a pretty serious housing crisis, but do you really think encouraging people to squat in private properties is the way to fix it?" asked co-host Sarah Harris. “Let me answer your question by asking you a question. Do you think it’s right we have thousands of vacant, abandoned homes while we have people living on the street?” van de Berg replied. Harris said she didn’t and asked whether the solving the housing crisis should be focused on policy instead. Later in the interview, panellist Steve Price casted his doubts on whether there actually were a lot of vacant homes, but van de Berg replied that he'd received over 300 submissions from Aussies about empty homes in their suburbs. van de Berg also said that desperate people are even squatting in abandoned properties, and added: “If someone needs a house, they can reach out to me and I’ll send them [details about] an empty home." Harris was shocked that people would “basically camp out in abandoned houses with no power" which van den Berg argued that “camping out inside” was likely better than sleeping on the streets or in a park. Co-host Waleed Aly then asked whether van de Berg was encouraging people to break the law, but he pointed out that squatting – done properly – isn’t technically illegal. The interview has been slammed on social media, with Writer and comedian John Delmenico posting on X: “Watching the rich out-of-touch panel on the Project realise in real time that not everyone is rich is so bizarre. "Especially the part where Pingers has to explain that being in a house is safer than sleeping on the street. How do they host the news with no connection to reality?” Others agreed mocking the panellists’ shock that “shelter without electricity is better than no shelter with no electricity”. “She was laughing at the fact that ppl would camp out in abandoned houses with no power/water, until he put her in her place by reminding her they’re better off camping under shelter than outside. Mic drop moment," one wrote. “Homelessness exists … it’s quite a big problem actually," another added. However, a few others agreed with the Project hosts. “Encouraging people to squat, who does he think he is?" one wrote. “He thinks he’s doing a good thing, but he’s given absolutely no critical thought to the implications of encouraging people to take over ‘empty homes’," another added. Leo Patterson Ross, chief executive of the Tenants Union of NSW, said that van den Berg was “drawing attention to issues that government should be acting on”. “In the middle of a housing crisis with growing levels of homelessness, we should be looking to ensure homes are not left vacant,” Patterson Ross said. “If a person leaves a property unattended and empty for 12 years, then I think many of us would agree it seems fair that the community can reclaim usage to provide a home, whether that be individuals or government.” Image: The Project

Legal

Qantas announces major price hike

Qantas customers have been warned that they will see a significant increase in price to the airline’s domestic club lounges from next month. For the first time in seven years, the airline will charge Qantas Club membership holders 17 per cent more to access their lounges, with price changes set to be made from April 18. The increase coincides with Qantas' plans to renovate 24 of their domestic lounges over the next year, with the carrier spending an estimated $100 million on renovations. This means that annual fees for new members will increase from $699 to $828, including the $129 joining fee. For current members looking to renew, their annual fees will rise from $540 to $629. “This is the first time the Qantas Club membership fees have increased in seven years and will help cover cost increases passed on from a range of suppliers over that time. This follows a reduction in the membership fees for several years during the pandemic,” a spokesperson told news.com.au. They added that these changes will not affect Qantas Frequent Flyers members who will continue to receive complimentary access to the Club through Points Club Plus or their Gold, Platinum or Platinum One status. Members can also avoid the price hike if they renew their membership before April 18. Image: Getty

Money & Banking

Millions of Aussies set for power bill relief

Millions of Aussies are set for some financial relief, with electricity costs set to drop by up to 7 per cent in the coming months. The Australian Energy Regulator (AER) and Victoria's Essential Services Commission (ESC) both released their draft default market offers - the maximum energy retailers are allowed to charge customers - for the 2024-25 financial year. Under the AER draft, residents in Sydney, Newcastle and the Hunter on the default offer will pay between 3 and 3.4 per cent less for electricity starting from July 1. The biggest drop is set for Victoria, with the ESC proposing a 6.4 per cent decrease. Those in Western Sydney, the Illawarra, and South Coast, will see their electricity bills decrease by 1.9 to 7.1 per cent. South Australians will receive a drop between 0.5 and 2.5 per cent. A number of small business customers will also benefit from lower power bill costs with 9.7 per cent for Sydney, Newcastle and the Hunter; 4.4 per cent for Western Sydney and the South Coast; 0.3 per cent for South-East Queensland; 8.2 per cent for South Australia; and 7 per cent for Victoria. Energy Minister Chris Bowen welcomed the news of lower power bill costs, but acknowledged that it will continue to play a part in the cost of living challenges faced by many Australians. "This is encouraging news," he said. "Encouraging for those small businesses and families who will receive lower energy bills as a result. "But nobody should suggest that there aren't real cost of living pressures around the world and in Australia, and energy prices are of course part of that and will continue to be." Not everyone will see a drop, with customers in the rest of regional NSW to get a small increase of 0.9 per cent, while the default offer for South East Queensland will increase by up to 2.7 per cent. While not all households are on the default offer, Bowen said that the AER's decision will also affect those not on the offer. "This either impacts directly or indirectly your energy bill," he said. "Directly for those on the default market offer. For those who aren't on the direct market offer, indirectly - the energy companies have to benchmark themselves against this, tell their consumers how they compare to this, and it provides very real pressure on them to match it. "If they don't, consumers will know about it and will make choices accordingly. "It's partly about those on the default market offer, but it actually impacts on all our bills indirectly." AER chair Clare Savage said that the cost of living crisis was the main contributor for their draft decision. "We know that economic conditions have put pressure on many Australians and the increases in electricity prices over the last two years has made energy less affordable for many households," she said. "In light of this, the AER has, in this decision, placed increased weight on protecting consumers." The draft decision is not final, with both the AER and ESC to receive consultation and feedback from stakeholders before confirming their default market offers in May. Image: Getty

Money & Banking

What is negative gearing and what is it doing to housing affordability?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michelle-cull-340911">Michelle Cull</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a> Australia’s housing crisis is putting the <a href="https://www.mortgagechoice.com.au/guides/what-is-the-great-australian-dream/">Australian dream</a> to own one’s home out of reach for many. But it’s not just <a href="https://www.aihw.gov.au/reports/australias-welfare/home-ownership-and-housing-tenure">home ownership</a> that has been affected. Rental affordability has also become a serious issue. This has reignited the debate about negative gearing; whether or not it is fair and whether it holds the key to fixing the housing crisis. <h2>What is negative gearing?</h2> <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/review/tax-white-paper/negative-gearing">Negative gearing</a> refers to using borrowed money to invest in an asset so it results in a loss which can be claimed as a tax deduction against other income. For example, a property investment is negatively geared if the net rental income received is lower than the mortgage interest. The loss is then offset against other income, such as wages and salaries, which reduces the amount of income tax payable. Negative gearing is commonly used for property investments but also applies to other investments (such as shares). Investments can also be positively geared when net income from the investment is more than the interest on borrowings. The attractiveness of negative gearing in Australia is mainly due to its ability to reduce the amount of income tax. For this reason, it can be more beneficial to individuals who are on higher marginal tax rates. However, capital gains tax must be paid on any gain when the asset is sold. <h2>How does negative gearing work?</h2> Let’s look at a simple example of negative gearing. Say an investment property was rented to tenants at A$500 a week ($26,000 a year), and associated expenses (such as agent fees, rates, mortgage interest, maintenance) were $40,000 for the year. This leaves a shortfall of $14,000. The property owner can deduct the $14,000 from their taxable income to reduce their liability. For example if they received $100,000 from wages, they would pay tax on only $86,000 (saving $4,550 in income tax). Individuals on higher incomes and therefore higher marginal tax rates would receive larger tax deductions (for example, someone earning over $180,001 would pay $6,300 less tax). While negative gearing an investment property can reduce tax while it is being rented, it can also result in a large <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/individuals-and-families/investments-and-assets/capital-gains-tax/what-is-capital-gains-tax">capital gains tax</a> bill once the property is sold (even though capital gains tax is halved for assets held for more than 12 months). For example, if the cost base for a property purchased ten years ago was $400,000 and it sells for $900,000 today, capital gains tax would be calculated on half of the $500,000 difference. At a marginal rate of 45%, the tax bill would be $112,500. <h2>How widespread is it in Australia?</h2> According to the <a href="https://data.gov.au/data/dataset/taxation-statistics-2020-21">Australian Taxation Office</a>, about 2.25 million individual tax payers (21% of all individual tax payers) claimed deductions against rental income for a total 3.25 million properties in 2020-21 financial year. Of these, 47% negatively geared their properties, claiming a net rental loss. This is equivalent to just less than 10% of all taxpayers. Investors with fewer properties were more likely to be using negative gearing with over 71% of property investors having only one investment property. <hr /> <iframe id="Wv9lV" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/Wv9lV/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> The largest group of property investors (524,220) had one investment property and a total annual taxable income between $50,001 and $100,000. The chart above shows the proportion of property investors by age group. From 2016-2017 to 2020-2021, the total net rental income on property investments in Australia went from a loss of $3.3 billion to a gain of $3.1 billion (as you can see from the chart below). For the same period, the proportion of investors negatively gearing their properties dropped from 58% to 47%, as lower interest rates reduced losses. <hr /> <iframe id="fXnoe" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" style="border: none;" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/fXnoe/" width="100%" height="400px" frameborder="0"></iframe> <hr /> Negative gearing is also becoming less attractive with the government’s recent changes to <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/tax-cuts">tax brackets and marginal tax rates</a>. According to a study conducted by <a href="https://www.pexa.com.au/staticly-media/2023/03/Whitepaper-2-Private-renting-in-Australia-a-broken-system_compressed-sm-1679450145.pdf">LongView and PEXA</a>, 60% of property investors would be financially better off if they instead put their money into a superannuation fund. <h2>When was it introduced?</h2> Negative gearing has been allowed under tax laws since 1936. It was thought it would encourage investment in housing and increase supply. However, debate around its impact on housing affordability led the government to partially abolish it in 1985 by not allowing rental property losses to reduce tax on other sources of income. There was a shortage of housing and rents rose during the two years it was abolished. As a result, in 1987, negative gearing was reinstated and capital gains tax legislation was introduced. <h2>Is it used in other countries?</h2> Canada, Germany, Japan and Norway use negative gearing. In Finland, France and the United States, rental losses can offset future rental income only. In the US, <a href="https://www.irs.gov/publications/p936#en_US_2023_publink1000229891">home owners are entitled</a> to claim a tax deduction for mortgage interest on their own home. The use and benefit of negative gearing depends upon all aspects of a country’s tax system. So although it may be attractive in countries with high marginal tax rates, other taxes such as capital gains tax, land tax and stamp duties may reduce its appeal. <h2>Negative gearing’s impact on housing affordability</h2> Many factors affect the cost of housing, including interest rates, inflation, employment, the overall taxation system and population growth, making housing affordability a complex issue. <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/nz-kills-tax-loophole-on-property-to-slow-soaring-house-prices-20210323-p57d9s.html">In New Zealand, negative gearing is being phased out</a> due to its impact on housing prices. However, unlike Australia, New Zealand does not have capital gains tax, making negative gearing more popular and more likely to impact housing prices. In addition to phasing out negative gearing, the New Zealand government <a href="https://www.hud.govt.nz/our-work/public-housing-plan/">increased the supply of public housing</a> and <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-09-25/nz-auckland-house-supply-experiment-results-in-dramatic-change/102846126">relaxed zoning regulations</a> to provide more affordable housing. In Australia, however, there are concerns abolishing negative gearing will cause rents to rise, as they did in the 1980s. More innovative approaches to housing affordability are needed to ensure ample supply of property for first home buyers and tenants. Some consideration could be given to allowing first home buyers to claim a tax deduction for mortgage interest, increasing capital gains tax, limiting the number or type of investment properties held, capping rent increases, or more infrastructure investment from the government for first home buyers and social housing. One or more of these measures would be a step in the right direction. Negative gearing on its own is not the answer to housing affordability. The whole system needs an overhaul, with a combination of measures needed to adequately address affordability, for now and for future generations. Taking no action will put home ownership out of reach for even more Australians.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/223823/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/michelle-cull-340911">Michelle Cull</a>, Associate professor, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/western-sydney-university-1092">Western Sydney University</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-negative-gearing-and-what-is-it-doing-to-housing-affordability-223823">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

Restaurant sparks outrage for "ridiculous" fee

As inflation rates continue to rise it is not surprising that restaurants are charging extra fees, but one disgruntled customer was particularly shocked to see this "ridiculous" fee on their bill. The customer, who dined at restaurant and cocktail bar in Georgia, USA shamed the restaurant for charging their customers a $20 fee for “live band entertainment”. They shared their complaints on Reddit with a copy of their receipt and an unexpected fee at the bottom which read: “Two Live Band Entertainment Fee — $20”. Most people in the comments were equally annoyed and called the fee "ridiculous". “This is one of those leave money on the table, hand the waiter a tip and leave, sorry but if I didn’t order it, I’m not paying for it,” one wrote. “Great way to not have repeat customers,” said another. “This will backfire for them, just be honest and upfront," a third added. Other commenters were less sympathetic and did not understand why the customer was complaining when it looked like they could afford it. “When you’re paying seven dollars for a bottle of water, you really don’t get to complain about ‘unexpected costs.’ You knew what you signed up for," one commenter wrote. “Imagine a live band getting paid, huh,” another added. “They’re buying $7 bottles of water, they can probably afford it,” added a third. Image: Getty/ Reddit

Money & Banking

How baby boomers are benefiting from Australia's "worst financial mistake"

A financial expert has explained how baby boomers have remained largely unscathed by the ongoing housing crisis in Australia. ABC finance guru Alan Kohler described the crisis as Australia's "worst financial mistake", as Adelaide has now become the country's second least affordable city. The South Australian capital, which has long been known as one of the more affordable places in the country to live, has skyrocketed in price, as the median price for houses and units in Adelaide was $721,376 in January, which is 7.9 times higher than the state's average full-time salary of $91,026. "There are a couple of things that might surprise you: Adelaide became the second, least affordable Australian city last year," Mr Kohler explained. "Adelaide has just taken over from Hobart in second place." "What's going on: put simply, incomes in Adelaide, Hobart and Brisbane are not keeping up with house prices, which are being pushed up by fast-rising population and by first-home buyers." Mr Kohler, a baby boomer, noted that when he and his wife bought their first home in Melbourne for $40,000 in 1980, he was earning $11,500 as a journalist, meaning his home cost just 3.5 times his income before a mortgage deposit. "When my wife and I bought our first house in 1980, the average house price was 3.5 times average income," he said. "Now, it's 7.5 times and rising." "That didn't have to happen: it's Australia's worst, economic mistake." Mr Kohler said parents were increasingly propping up the mortgage deposits of first-home buyers, as first-home buyer subsidies from the federal government only pushed up property prices. "Despite rising prices and crushing interest rates, first-home buyers were the fastest-growing type of borrower," he said. "The Bank of Mum and Dad coughing up early inheritances and politicians showering them with grants and concessions, desperate to appear to be doing something about affordability while actually making it worse." Image credits: Shutterstock / ABC

Money & Banking

Restaurant's kind act for struggling Aussies

As Aussies continue to adapt to the rising cost-of-living, one restaurant owner took it upon herself to give back to the "struggling" community. Aleeya Hamidan the owner of Manoosh & Co in Eagle Vale, southwest of Sydney, realised that a lot of people in the community are struggling to afford food. "Prices are going up in rent, and there are a lot of large families that live here as well. They don't have much spare money to go out and eat with their kids after school," she told Yahoo News Australia. So, she decided to implement a system where customers in need can get a free meal that has been paid for by other customers. The text: "Please take one if [you're] in need!! Already paid for from our beautiful customers" is written on a whiteboard, with six receipts containing various orders valued at around $10-$12 attached to it. Hamidan was the first to put up an order on the board a few weeks ago to encourage other customers to do the same, and the system has grown in popularity since. "One man came in a few weeks ago and took one of the free meals, but the following week when he did have money, he purchased one for someone else," she said. "We just didn't want it to be intimidating for people who can't afford our products. "It was just something we started doing for a little but have now continued to do. We've had such amazing feedback on it." The restaurant owner's kind deed was praised after local woman Amanda Mauga posted a picture of the board on social media. "If you are having a hard time and need a meal or coffee, go down to Manoosh Eagle Vale," she shared in a community Facebook page. "People buy food for people who need it. So if you're in need head down there, I have left you a coffee. Enjoy." Mauga said that she "felt inspired to help" after seeing the thoughtful gesture, and wanted to help those who were homeless and struggling in their community "in some small way". The post racked up thousands of likes and comments from people impressed by the "great initiative". "What a great idea! We need more like this. So many people are struggling, bravo," one wrote. "Well done folks... nice there are caring people around," another commented "What an amazing shop for even doing this," a third commented. Images: Manoosh & Co

Domestic Travel

Real estate agency slammed for "greedy" rental increase

Real estate agency Nelson Alexander has come under fire after increasing the weekly rent to one of their vacant properties on the day of the viewing. The property, located in the inner suburbs of Melbourne, had a scheduled viewing on Thursday and many hopeful tenants were keen to check it out. Unfortunately, their interest came at a cost, as the agency sent out a text just hours beforehand saying that they were increasing the weekly rent from $600 to $650 due to "overwhelming" demand. Journalist Jacqueline Felgate shared the text on social media, and many branded the agency's move as "greedy" and "disgraceful" and even accused them of perpetuating the rental crisis. The exact location of the property and the number of bedrooms it has is unknown, and after receiving all the backlash, the ad has since been pulled. The real estate agency also apologised and said that they "do not solicit or encourage any form of rental bidding". "Whilst the current issue at hand is not a breach of legislation, it fell short of our commitment to fair and transparent practices," the statement read. "We are deeply aware of the moral and social responsibility we have to our community during these challenging times." They also added that they are currently reviewing their processes to "ensure this doesn't ever happen again". It is unclear whether the property has been put back on the market and for what price. <em style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: baseline; color: #323338; font-family: Figtree, Roboto, 'Noto Sans Hebrew', 'Noto Kufi Arabic', 'Noto Sans JP', sans-serif; background-color: #ffffff; outline: none !important;">Images: Instagram

Money & Banking

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Nat Barr slammed for “out of touch” comments about the housing crisis

New calls for Boomers to end housing crisis

"Stop the blame game": Kochie slams young Aussie homebuyers

Yomojo savings: A lifeline in the cost-of-living crisis

Is nuclear the answer to Australia’s climate crisis?

Cafe providing free meals to families faces shutdown

"Rentirement": Bold new proposition for housing crisis

Dad forced to live in tent amid housing crisis

Channel 10 axes another show amid ratings crisis

“Greedy” landlord slammed for illegal act

Our housing system is broken and the poorest Australians are being hardest hit

Family of eight forced to live in tent amid rental crisis

"Out-of-touch" Project stars slammed over clash with renter advocate

Qantas announces major price hike

Millions of Aussies set for power bill relief

What is negative gearing and what is it doing to housing affordability?

Restaurant sparks outrage for "ridiculous" fee

How baby boomers are benefiting from Australia's "worst financial mistake"

Restaurant's kind act for struggling Aussies

Real estate agency slammed for "greedy" rental increase

Our Partners