[The Claw]

Everything I have said and no mention of credit.

Shortage proven

[gibber_blot]

The Claw, on 14 December 2011 - 02:12 AM, said:

Everything I have said and no mention of credit.

Shortage proven

It seems that you and I have a very different definition of "proof". From this, should we conclude that there is a shortage of books and luxury cars in Australia?

It's pretty simple: land restrictions + easy credit drive up prices. It is why areas with strict planning regulations end up with excess housing (Spain, California, Florida), and those with more liberal policies (Texas) do not. The building never occurs in the more liberal areas because there really is no shortage, while in the heavily "planned" areas, there is a perception of a shortage due to price. The shortage sympathisers** fall for it every time, but are wrong. But maybe you are right: maybe "it's different here".



** People would take you more seriously if you didn't use the term "shortage denier". I know it's a deliberate comparison to "holocaust denier", but it just sounds like it is coming from an extremist.

[tor]

No one denies there was an aspirational shortage do they?

[ummester]

tor, on 14 December 2011 - 03:50 AM, said:

No one denies there was an aspirational shortage do they?

Like no-one denies that spruikers and the overleveraged in housing aspire for there to be a true shortage.

Hey Claw - a very simple question that I have never asked you. Do you have any vested interest in property values not correcting?

[Bernard L. Madoff]

Surprised a mod hasn't deleted this spruiker waffle. Just utter bollocks.

House building to population growth was less in the 60s, 70s, and 80s and no bubble, housing growth went with CPI (periods of high inflation included.

Select Broad Money Supply and Housing debt...
http://www.australia....com.au/history

[tor]

Apparently not claw. We all agree that lots of people want nicer houses in nicer places than they currently have.

Just like you.

For my money the only way to be happy is to accept the level you suck at and choose the best lifestyle which is affordable to someone that sucks at that level.

We live in the same suburb (claw and I) and yet I feel like I am winning at the lifestyle game and he thinks people are out o grind him down. This was the case when I was renting (in the same suburb) as well.

Oddly enough everyone I know envies my lifestyle.

Maybe the suburb is not so bad. Or maybe I have just settled for less than I should desire.

Personally given your intellectual prowess displayed here I am surprised you are in the same league as me. I am flabbergasted that you think you deserve better. You really do come across as quite the competent moron.

[wim]

tor, on 14 December 2011 - 09:11 AM, said:

We live in the same suburb (claw and I)

I'm pleased to hear you and claw are so close

[The Claw]

Bernard L. Madoff, on 14 December 2011 - 06:39 AM, said:

Surprised a mod hasn't deleted this spruiker waffle. Just utter bollocks.

House building to population growth was less in the 60s, 70s, and 80s and no bubble, housing growth went with CPI (periods of high inflation included.

Select Broad Money Supply and Housing debt...
http://www.australia....com.au/history

Your blunder is that you neglect all the population forced out by the shortage.

[The Claw]

ummester, on 14 December 2011 - 06:33 AM, said:

Hey Claw - a very simple question that I have never asked you. Do you have any vested interest in property values not correcting?

Nah. I want prices to fall (like Spain, Ireland etc)

[tor]

The Claw, on 14 December 2011 - 12:00 PM, said:

Your blunder is that you neglect all the population forced out by the shortage.

There is a shortage because people are forced out by the shortage?

heh.

Facts:
There are more people in Sydney now than ever before in history.
We have more houses per person than there were previously.
You have said there was not a shortage in the 60's and 70's.
You have said there is a shortage now.

Logic:
For all four statements to be true Houses per person cannot be part of your definition of shortage.

Supposition:
Many people would disagree with you.

Observation:
Many people disagree with you.

[The Claw]

tor, on 14 December 2011 - 06:24 PM, said:

There is a shortage because people are forced out by the shortage?

heh.

Facts:
There are more people in Sydney now than ever before in history.
We have more houses per person than there were previously.
You have said there was not a shortage in the 60's and 70's.
You have said there is a shortage now.

Logic:
For all four statements to be true Houses per person cannot be part of your definition of shortage.

Supposition:
Many people would disagree with you.

Observation:
Many people disagree with you.

I'm sure that you could nit-pick many things that I post.

However my understanding of the problem is that poorer Sydney-born people are being forced-out by a flood of rich immigrants. They suffer A SHORTAGE as a result of the immigrants.

This would not bother me so much if Sydney was the only place in Australia suffering shortage. However analysis of the situation shows that shortage is widespread. Choking and poking. Plenty of evidence.

link

Read the link. An influx of miners combined with unresponsive supply from govt results in A SHORTAGE which affects poorer locals from the towns. Yes morons, there is a shortage as a result of more people coming in. One rich miner can displace a poor family of five. Yes morons, a shortage can exist while there are more houses per people than before.

[tor]

The Claw, on 14 December 2011 - 10:50 PM, said:

However my understanding of the problem is that poorer Sydney-born people are being forced-out by a flood of rich immigrants. They suffer A SHORTAGE as a result of the immigrants.

If your thesis was correct then the number of people leaving Sydney would have a very strong correlation to the shortage you believe in, correct?

[The Claw]

tor, on 14 December 2011 - 11:28 PM, said:

If your thesis was correct then the number of people leaving Sydney would have a very strong correlation to the shortage you believe in, correct?

Strictly speaking no. You have made a statistical blunder.

Shortage does indeed cause people to leave but there are other factors that can also do this.

For example in 1970 it was very unusual for a young person to have a stint of work overseas. It was difficult to arrange, expensive to travel, and basically not the done thing. Now that has all changed.

What you will find is that areas with no shortage will have cheap housing but people will still move away FOR OTHER REASONS. These people could be asked the reasons, and might tell you.
In areas with shortage housing will be expensive and people will move away for other reasons AND DUE TO EXPENSIVE HOUSING. These people could be asked the reasons, and might tell you. Perhaps you could commission a survey. The data might convince you of the truth where I have failed.

[tor]

The Claw, on 15 December 2011 - 12:35 AM, said:

Strictly speaking no. You have made a statistical blunder.

Shortage does indeed cause people to leave but there are other factors that can also do this.

For example in 1970 it was very unusual for a young person to have a stint of work overseas. It was difficult to arrange, expensive to travel, and basically not the done thing. Now that has all changed.

What you will find is that areas with no shortage will have cheap housing but people will still move away FOR OTHER REASONS. These people could be asked the reasons, and might tell you.
In areas with shortage housing will be expensive and people will move away for other reasons AND DUE TO EXPENSIVE HOUSING. These people could be asked the reasons, and might tell you. Perhaps you could commission a survey. The data might convince you of the truth where I have failed.

So we are back to "I have an idea which cannot ever be proved using data"

Which makes it irrelevant as far as I am concerned. If it can't be proved then it can't be disproved and it becomes a religion. I am not religious.

[The Claw]

tor, on 15 December 2011 - 01:07 AM, said:

So we are back to "I have an idea which cannot ever be proved using data"

Which makes it irrelevant as far as I am concerned. If it can't be proved then it can't be disproved and it becomes a religion. I am not religious.

Good. Then do us all a favour and stop contradicting me I post about the shortage. You cannot disprove what I post, so stop trying.

Ordinary people in Australia don't care about what you think. Many care about the future of their children and about their ability to afford decent housing. I care about this. I explain the cause of the problem. I explain the solution. I will continue to post for the benefit of these ordinary people.

[Turkey]

The Claw, on 15 December 2011 - 01:39 AM, said:

Good. Then do us all a favour and stop contradicting me I post about the shortage. You cannot disprove what I post, so stop trying.

That does sound religious, nobody can disprove the invisible flying spaghetti monster either.

[tor]

The Claw, on 15 December 2011 - 01:39 AM, said:

Good. Then do us all a favour and stop contradicting me I post about the shortage. You cannot disprove what I post, so stop trying.

I think you missed the point, I love riling up anyone that is a evangelical nutbag.

Those that use religion simply as a basis of understanding the world I have no issue with, the evangelicals I do.

You are evangelical. Otherwise you'd shut up and live your quiet delusional life by yourself.

The Claw, on 15 December 2011 - 01:39 AM, said:

Ordinary people in Australia don't care about what you think. Many care about the future of their children and about their ability to afford decent housing. I care about this. I explain the cause of the problem. I explain the solution. I will continue to post for the benefit of these ordinary people.

ahahahaha you noble bastard!

Seriously though you have no data to back up your idea which means your solutions are completely fact free; data and fact having quite a strong relationship.

If your problem cannot be measured then your solution cannot be either. Ergo your solution is a lot of hot air. In my experience anyone offering a solution that cannot be measured is a ripoff artist.

I strongly suspect that if you are living in Hornsby (renting or not) and think there is a shortage (aspirational or not) that you earn more than the average australian and they would regard you as just another selfish person pretending to care about what they think.

As a side note I would strongly suspect that "the ordinary people" in Australia should probably care more about what I (and those of my ilk) think. We are the people that hire them, pay the taxes and generally keep the country going in a way which lets them lead their lives. Knowing what people that control your destiny in such an intrinsic manner think would be handy, knowing what some mid level delusional whiner thinks? not so important.

[recession we had to have]

Turkey, on 15 December 2011 - 01:53 AM, said:

That does sound religious, nobody can disprove the invisible flying spaghetti monster either.

Gentlemen, gentlemen, all this squabbling is getting us nowhere when we should be focussing on the real problem here- How do we protect ourselves from the invisible flying spaghetti monster?

[tor]

recession we had to have, on 15 December 2011 - 02:08 AM, said:

Gentlemen, gentlemen, all this squabbling is getting us nowhere when we should be focussing on the real problem here- How do we protect ourselves from the invisible flying spaghetti monster?

[Max Carnage]

Ha! Funny.

We have a shortage of shares too. The proofs are all there:
- High prices (historically and relative to other countries).
- Government regulation.
- People who would own more or better shares if they could afford to.