iajanus posted:

Surprising to see reporters doing their jobs for once.

Mithranderp posted:

‘I think there does need to be give and take on both sides, and this idea that sex is kind of a woman’s right to absolutely withhold, just as the idea that sex is a man’s right to demand I think they are both they both need to be moderated, so to speak’

Lizard Combatant posted:

obligatory:

Lizard Combatant posted:

poo poo! Gimme a sec...

e:



better?

ewe2 posted:

The safety word is "schmackos".

quote:

When the Reserve Bank of Australia cut interest rates last month there was always a risk that it might reinflate the housing bubble. It was a risk the central bank was prepared to take.

But a new spike in prices over the past month suggests the housing soufflé has started to rise yet again.

The unexpected leap in the value of homes has taken the annual growth rate to 10 per cent across the board and to more than 13 per cent in Sydney and Melbourne, according to CoreLogic's home value index. And it has taken the median dwelling price in Sydney to $782,000 and in Melbourne to $590,000.

starkebn posted:

LNP are the best at economic management

quote:

The sharp rise in the construction of new apartments may be the catalyst for a "dramatic and destabilising" end to the current housing boom, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has warned.

"Domestically, the unwinding of housing market tensions to date may presage dramatic and destabilising developments, rather than herald a soft landing," said the OECD in its latest report.

The Paris-based think tank also says federal election jitters are adding to Australia's economic concerns, and has called for an increase in the goods and services tax.

The record number of apartments due for completion in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane over the next 18 months already has real estate industry insiders concerned.

Failed settlements are cropping up as a major concern, especially at a time when the banks are tightening credit, meaning buyers who paid a 10 per cent deposit two years ago and are relying on a 90 per cent loan to fill out the rest of the purchase, may now have to pay more.

While house prices surged in May, research firm Core Logic has said the current rises will not last, as regulators tighten lending standards.

"Recent data from APRA highlights that interest-only lending is now at its lowest level since March 2013 and new mortgages with a loan to value ratio to higher than 90 per cent are at the lowest reading since March 2011," said Tim Lawless, head of research at CoreLogic recently.

The OECD's warning comes alongside a graph, showing house prices plateauing and private dwelling approvals sinking from a peak.

The housing market faces considerable difficulties, amid a period of stricter regulation on lending coupled with record-low interest rates prompting more and more people to borrow.

quote:

After banks put the brakes on lending to property investors in 2015, several are now easing off the pressure and trying to spur on more borrowing among buyers who drove the recent housing boom.

The changes are intended to lift banks' loan growth after a regulatory crackdown, but economists also say stronger lending to property investors could create new risks, amid signs house prices are heating up again.

In what mortgage brokers say is a clear trend, several banks have recently shown a greater willingness to lend for property investment.

Westpac, the country's biggest lender to landlords, this week began allowing customers to include the tax benefits from negative gearing in their loan assessments, unwinding changes made last year, and last month it started accepting smaller deposits from investors.

Bank of Queensland last month raised its maximum loan to valuation ratio (LVR) for investors to 90 per cent, from 80 per cent, a change that allows investors to have smaller deposits.

Australia's biggest credit union, CUA, also lifted its maximum LVR to 85 per cent, from 70 per cent.

Other banks are using the other big "lever" at their disposal to ramp up growth – price.

Fixed rate cuts
Lenders including Bankwest, ME and UBank have cut three-year fixed rates for investors below 4 per cent, and brokers say lenders including Commonwealth Bank are prepared to offer discounts of up to 1.5 per cent off their advertised interest rates.

The changes follow a near halving in housing investor credit growth, from a peak of 11 per cent a year in 2015 to 6.5 per cent, after the banking regulator capped growth in this market at 10 per cent a year.

"Banks don't want to miss the market," said chief executive of Mortgage Choice, John Flavell.

"If the market has come off a bit for investors, and it has done, then you can turn around and moderate your policies and your pricing to get your loan growth up towards your cap.

"And that's exactly what's happened. But it's for Australian income-earning investors, not those overseas."


APRA's cooling move
A boom in lending to housing investors was a key factor behind fears of an overheating housing market in Sydney and Melbourne in recent years, which prompted the 10 per cent cap from the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority.

To comply with the cap, banks slashed how much they would lend borrowers through tougher rules on deposits, borrower income, and by charging investors higher interest rates.

Head of product at CUA, Mark Petty, said its changes were aimed at lifting growth up closer towards 10 per cent, though investor lending only accounts for about a quarter of its home lending. Other lenders have made similar changes, he says.

"Clearly they have managed down their balance growth to below 10 per cent, in accordance with APRA's direction, and they are seeing opportunities to grow again," Mr Petty said.

Competition resumes
Managing director of mortgage broker Homeloanexperts.com.au, Otto Dargan, said several lenders, including Commonwealth Bank, had become more competitive in their home loan pricing for investors in recent months, by offering lower interest rates.

These lower interest rates are not always publicly promoted, but can include discounts off the standard variable rate for investors of up to 1.5 per cent.

"The name of the game is to get as close to the 10 per cent APRA target without going over it," Mr Dargan said.

However, the banks' change in tack comes as house price growth has returned, with figures this week showing Sydney prices jumped 3.6 per cent in May, and 1.6 per cent in Melbourne.

If the growth continues, APRA and the Reserve Bank may need to consider lowering the 10 cent cap on investor credit growth, some economists say.

Too cautious?
AMP Capital chief economist Shane Oliver said APRA's 10 per cent cap appeared "quite excessive in the scheme of things" when compared with the much slower growth in household incomes.

Stronger growth in housing investor lending, which was suggested by recent housing finance approvals, would be a concern because household debt and house prices are already at very high levels, he said.

When there are also fears of an apartment glut in some inner-city areas, Dr Oliver said the prospect of looser credit standards and stronger growth in housing investor debt amplified the potential for serious problems to emerge, if there was a slump in house prices.

"The higher prices are when that occurs, then the greater the risk is of a sharp destabilising fall," he said.

quote:

...when it comes to trade and, in particular, reliance on China, that's the territory in which we find ourselves.

Almost 35 per cent of our export trade is dominated by just one country. Of that, most consists of just one commodity: iron ore.

SynthOrange posted:

Stoca Zola posted:

Phone posting but wtf greens is this real? "This morning we announced our plan to put solar panels on the rooftops of every household and every business."

Aren't photovoltaic panels still fairly environmentally damaging to manufacture (silicon tetrachloride) and increasingly panels are made in the countries less likely to look after the environment and their workers? Has that changed? What happens years from now when the panels wear out and need replacing? Can you recycle them (apparently yes if the facilities are available) or does this policy generate a huge pile of trash for future people to worry about? It's a problem if they aren't considering the full life cycle of the panels.

I've always believed in centralised large scale power generation so that repair, maintenance and end of life site clean up aren't the direct responsibility of the homeowners. Solar thermal for example. Putting panels on every roof seems like an incredibly inefficient way to do it. Maybe that's part of the plan though, this inefficiency creates more work for more installers and more maintenance jobs for post installation panel cleaners, recycling facilities etc?

I'm interested if there is any evidence that they've thought this through.

SMILLENNIALSMILLEN posted:

The long wind up time for nuclear is mostly a result of regulatory issues and waste isnt an issue with breeder reactors. I dont think renewables are ever going to be able to meet the worlds power demands, at least not in the next few decades. Of the feasible options nuclear looks the least horrible imo. More people died as a result of the evacuation of fukushima than would have had they stayed.


http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/09/22/science/when-radiation-isnt-the-real-risk.html?smid=tw-nytimesscience&smtyp=cur&referer=

ewe2 posted:

Really explanatory picture here. I had a passionate geography teacher in my late-70's high-school, so we learnt a lot about the geomorphology of beaches, took trips to Surfers and the northern beaches to learn precisely these issues. Saw the useless rock walls, etc, learnt about the prevailing wind/currents, the use of the sandbar, and the ecology of the beach from the waters edge back into the hinterland.

What hasn't been pointed out by learned wombat74, is look where the buildings are. Right on the first dune. Guess what keeps the beach from collapsing? Yup. Guess what mistake has been made right the way up to Surfers? Yup.

The first dune is part of the beach's integrity, it's not just the sand it's the vegetation that holds it together and protects it against being disrupted. If it's compromised and you get king/storm tides like this, you get that, every time. You've essentially made a line between the dune and the beach and the beach goes with the wind/waves and takes a swipe out of the dune as it goes.

Notice to the north of the picture where the dune is more intact, and there's still beach? Never build on the first dune. On some beaches north of Brisbane and even down here in Victoria, they fence off the first dune to stop people destroying it with random paths. You can't plan for king/storm tides. They'll happen randomly every 30-40 years, maybe sooner. You can only avoid loving up the beach in the first place, or learn this expensive lesson.

Zenithe posted:

I had a look last time this was mentioned and couldn't find anything to support it and have yet to hear it outside this thread. Was there some report done into nuclear viability in Australia or something?

ewe2 posted:

That was precisely the Gold Coast developers argument before they did a quick getaway with the cash. See also every coastal developer ever. This led to the godawful canals once the beachfront had been hosed up.

Pickled Tink posted:

Several kittens are missing because they are very sick.

open24hours posted:

It shouldn't really be legal to buy and sell property, or at least residential property, that can't be insured. Either the government should become an insurer of last resort, or they should be zoned so people can't live there. It's in no one's interest to have people losing their houses.

Recoome posted:

What? TONY ABBOT is evolving!

Congratulations! Your TONY ABBOT evolved into a MALCOLM TURNBULL!

Shakugan posted:

As hilarious as it is to see global warming denying rich asshats get their comeuppance, this thread is being a bit ridiculous with all the "OBVIOUSLY THAT WOULD HAPPEN! WHY DID THEY CHOOSE TO LIVE THERE? DIDN'T THEY READ THEIR HOUSING DOCUMENTS???" as if every (or even a moderate sized minority of) beachfront property ends up getting destroyed by erosion (hint: doesn't happen).

You can be a poo poo person but still be correct that you weren't properly made aware of the risks, and the real problem is the insurance agents who'll insure for certain types of damages but not other? Cause really "oh we only pay out for water damage from the sky, not water damage from the ground" is some serious bullshit.

Anidav posted:

Didn't someone post a theory that the ALP doesn't want government when the housing bubble pops?

open24hours posted:

Anidav posted:

Media is calling Tony Jones a Labor spokesman and saying Turnbull channelled his inner Howard on QnA????

Did the media watch the same episode?!

Au Revoir Shosanna posted:

Theoretically, wouldn't direct democracy solve problems like this?


Your average voter is more progressive than you'd think, they just vote Liberal because they are "better for the econony."

MC Eating Disorder posted:

honestly as much as I'd like the "LNP are good for the economy" myth to get busted and busted hard its basically a religious mantra at this point and nobody who seriously believes it is gonna blame the LNP instead of LABOR WASTE

Seagull posted:

it's still mind boggling that of all things labor won't flip on instantly for the popular vote is letting gay folks get married

WhiskeyWhiskers posted:

Can you imagine how undeservedly smug Abbott would feel if the libs lost and Turnbull lost his seat?

Granite Octopus posted:

Queensland worst state etc, but I didn't know the states could just dip into the super funds to pay down debt? I'm not particularly educated in these matters so pls ignore if this is old news. Still, it seems awfully risky, though I guess it won't matter since the boomers will have started to die off before the funds go into deficit.

Cartoon posted:

http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/breakfast/greens-outline-their-demands-in-the-event-of/7535720


This is smart politics. Even dyed in the wool National supporters want this. To use a casting vote position to force a clean up is exactly what the Democrats promised to do but never delivered. If the Greens pull this off they will require a gently caress up of Meg Lees proportions to ever lose third party status.

Solemn Sloth posted:

On this day my welsh ancestry shames me. Unless maybe they realise how hosed brexit will be and are prepared to sacrifice themselves to cast down the evil English

Anidav posted:

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says Coalition MPs will still be able to vote against gay marriage, even if voters back it in a plebiscite.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says Coalition MPs will still be able to vote against gay marriage, even if voters back it in a plebiscite.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says Coalition MPs will still be able to vote against gay marriage, even if voters back it in a plebiscite.

loving lol