Employment rate is excellent, plenty of work available, but stressed motgages really is a result of people who feel forced to buy a house in an expensive market. One can get either fixed or floating rate mortgages, many people opt for both, 50% fixed and 50% floating. Renting also is expensive and very difficult to obtain.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-22/australian-election-result-a-cry-for-change/101089194 Anthony Albanese's election win is a vote for change, but it's another dying gasp of an old order By Stan Grant Posted 10 minutes ago The election result is another dying gasp of an old order.(AAP: Diego Fedele) The poet Matthew Arnold wrote: "The bridge is cross'd, and slow we ride." That sums up this election. Arnold's poem Stanzas from the Grande Chartreusse was his quest for meaning in a world without faith. It perfectly captures the mood of our political times. Labor has crossed the bridge into government but with no great mandate, no sweeping reform, no grand vision. This is less a resounding vote for Labor — a dismal primary vote below 32 per cent — than a reflection of disillusioned voters, fed up with politics as usual and departing in droves from the major parties. This is a slow ride. Anthony Albanese charts rough seas. "The autumnal evening darkens round, "The wind is up, and drives the rain." We are living through "A dead time's exploded dream". Liberal democracy around the world is battered. It is exhausted. It appears out of ideas. No enthusiasm for major parties Australia's election campaign stumbled to a close with Albanese and Scott Morrison acting more like mortgage brokers trying to sell us a house. Buy now, pay later. We will even stump you the deposit or let you raid your super. That's what neoliberalism has delivered us: a "what's in it for me" election with no enthusiasm for major parties and no serious discussion of what really ails us. Western liberal democracy throughout the 20th century was built on two great ideas: the New Deal that drove American politics from the 1930s to 1980 and neoliberalism that promised a post-Cold-War world of market-driven globalisation and technological advancement, removal of barriers to trade and erasing borders: free movement of goods and people. The New Deal built on a compact between workers and business with a strong social safety net that helped fend off the appeal of socialism or communism. Stagflation of the 1970s — a mix of high inflation, low growth and high unemployment — dealt a death blow to the New Deal. By the time the Berlin Wall came down, that era was over. Neoliberalism appeared triumphant. Economies grew, poverty was reduced, progressive parties like Bob Hawke's Labor in Australia, later Tony Blair's Labour in Britain and Bill Clinton's Democrats in the US married their social agenda with the market-dominated economics of Britain's Margaret Thatcher and America's Ronald Reagan. A driver of political earthquakes As stagflation mortally wounded the New Deal, the global financial crash badly damaged neoliberalism. People felt abandoned and left behind. Inequality has skyrocketed. In the United States especially this has fractured the polity. Neoliberalism's faith in the market eroded communities. A cleavage has emerged between rural and urban populations — what British political writer David Goodhart called "somewheres and anywheres". This divide has driven political earthquakes like the Brexit vote and the Trump presidency in the US. Historian Gary Gerstle tracks this phenomenon in his book The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order. He says: "Losing the capacity to exercise ideological hegemony signals a political order's decline." Neoliberalism does not exercise ideological hegemony. Its fall has coincided with a democratic recession worldwide marked by an erosion of freedom, loss of faith in institutions, and democratic capture by autocratic strongmen. It's about protest and policy Globally there has been a coming apart. Identity is key. Democracy has been marked by tribal culture wars. Neoliberalism was founded on a paradoxical alliance of free-market ideology with what Gerstle called "neo-Victorianism" driven by the socially conservative religious right. On the left, Gerstle says black rights groups, feminism and multiculturalism also flourished in the neoliberal order which disrupted traditions and promoted hybridity and cosmopolitanism. The fracturing of the neoliberal order though has broken the identity wars wide open. The marginalised have occupied the centre. Liberalism doesn't speak to them. In some cases, these movements seek to up-end liberalism itself. Black Lives Matter is an example, breaking with the old civil rights leadership of the Martin Luther King Jr era. As one of the movement's key figures, Alicia Garza, said: "The model of the black preacher leading people to the promised land isn't working right now." Urgency and anger drive these movements that will not wait. They have heard it all before. Rawlsian liberalism, with its "veil of ignorance", neutrality and weightlessness, cannot bear the weight being put upon it by groups who feel abandoned or left behind. From the left to the right, identity groups are focused on disruption as much as change. It is about protest as much or even more than policy. A wave of protest The end of neoliberalism has created a void but few answers. It is a long death with the old guard of politics clinging to the corpse of neoliberalism, trying to breathe life into it. Here a wave of protest has washed over our federal election. The people are speaking, yet political leaders hear only what they want. Scott Morrison praised the strength of our democracy, and rightly so, yet this democracy has turfed him out not for what he has done but what he has not done. A vote against Morrison is not a vote for Albanese. The new prime minister says there was a mood for change but it is not Labor's change. It is change out of frustration. It is a cri de coeur. A bad moon is rising It is wrong to think this is all about a personal rejection of Morrison — that is part of it — or that Albanese will be a saviour. It is another dying gasp of an old order. It is a vote for change, but where is our purpose? Has it delivered us a parliament for the trying times ahead? A bad moon is rising. War is raging in Ukraine, and we are being told to prepare for war in our region. The world is in an inflationary cycle driving up interest rates and that will feed into higher unemployment. Supply chains are being disrupted. We are facing trillion-dollar debt. It will cost more to pay it back. China is recasting our world, an authoritarian superpower that is on track to be the biggest economy in the world. It is expanding its reach into what Australia considers its sphere of influence, the Pacific. The Solomons-China security pact has been a wake-up call. The 21st century will be defined by the big power rivalry between China and the United States. It will determine everything from the global economy to conflict to climate change. Does a parliament with a teal-coloured crossbench, more Greens, and a small-target Labor government have the answers to this age? We can hope so. More voices may bring more ideas.
One of western democracies biggest political problems, is rich people getting richer and taking seats of power upon themselves. Rich people buying themselves into politics and media. There needs to be a way, as you get richer you hit a ceiling, brought about by government taxes. Too much money brings power which brings corruption and manipulation.
I think this is what people call neo-Feudalism. The post-Depression (at least in the US) solution was an incredibly high marginal tax rate in the area of 90% for the leisure class and businesses. In reality the businesses just reinvested in the company to avoid have excess income. My guess you will see a movement that is hard left on the level of the FDR revolution but only after a market collapse that leads to a real depression that can't be papered over by infinite borrowing and MMT nonsense. Great insight by the author of that article. Better than I seen anywhere in the US press. Of course the US press is dominated by homerism of the Red states (Republicans) vs. Blue states (Democrats). The most amazing stat of the 2016 election was that 113 out of 114 newspapers endorsed Hillary Clinton. I think that's why the media here was crying for 4 years.
Australian students struggling to rent a home, let alone buy one By Millie Muroi May 22, 2022 https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...a-home-let-alone-buy-one-20220512-p5akw1.html Students are facing a triple threat of a post-recession economy, stagflation and rising interest rates – making moving out of home unaffordable and home ownership an unlikely prospect. Experts also warn that the trend of young people staying at home is putting more pressure on the housing market because parents cannot downsize. Sissy Qin says she wants to move out but that living costs such as rent are too high.Credit:Nick Moir University of Sydney student Sissy Qin wants to move out of home but said the cost of living is too high for it to be realistic. “I definitely want to move out,” she said. “I think the only reason I haven’t yet is because of financial reasons. Rent is really, really high.” Instead, she is fortunate enough to live rent-free with her parents, paying only for her groceries and working part-time to cover the costs of personal expenses. It’s part of a broader trend noticed by McCrindle Research’s principal Mark McCrindle. “There’s data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics showing that household size has gone up,” he said. “It’s not because birth rates have changed. More kids are staying home or returning to their parental home.” He also said a significant proportion of parents in his own research indicated that their children were delaying moving out. UNSW student Sirisha Kajur has no choice as her parents are moving overseas this year. Kajur is no stranger to spreadsheets – she works part-time as an accountant – but feels “nauseous” when she sees the stratospheric costs of moving out. “As someone moving out for the first time, it feels very discouraging to make the move of going independent when you see those prices,” she said. Despite working part-time, Kajur can only afford her rental costs. “All the other living costs, like food, I need help from my parents,” she said. “About 70 per cent [of my living costs] come from my parents.” Sissy Qin says she wants to move out but that costs like rent are too high.Credit:Nick Moir She has found a potential flatmate to reduce costs but said places within a five-kilometre radius of her university were expensive – between $600 and $900 a week. Average unit rent prices in NSW increased by about 28 per cent from the first quarter last year, to the same period this year. The increasing cost of renting means more young people are choosing to share accommodation, but those arrangements are less secure, according to McCrindle. “It’s unstable because you don’t end up with long-term leases,” he said. “One person in a group of four moves out and then the rental of that home is not sustainable.” McCrindle said insecure housing impacts young people’s job security, social engagement and sense of belonging. “If we’re constantly being moved from one place to the other, it’s hard to be consistent in the study or the job or, for that matter, the social network that we really need to thrive,” he said. And while student accommodation is an option, Kajur said it’s unlikely she’ll be able to find a place in time. “Everything on campus is on a waitlist so it’s a complete gamble.” International student Melisa Phanna said that, even with parental support, it was stressful trying to find an apartment when she moved to Sydney in January. “It was incredibly difficult because there were so many processes and [landlords] were looking for someone with a job,” she said. “You can’t just say you’re going to rely on your parents to pay for it. That’s what a lot of real estate agents pointed out to me.” And because she was looking for an area in which she could feel safe, Phanna said it was even more difficult. “It was really hard to find the balance of a place in a safe location at a decent price.” Phanna initially sought flatmates to reduce her costs, but said it was too difficult and that she settled on a six-month lease in a small but expensive apartment to rent. “It’s tiny; it’s like a mini hallway ... I’m scared they won’t continue my lease [at the current rent].” With inflation rising, Phanna is also feeling the pressure on other costs of living. “Grocery prices here have increased a lot ... They’re so expensive to the point where you’re better off just eating cheap takeaway which sucks.” Young people are particularly vulnerable to economic shocks because they generally don’t have much savings, McCrindle said. “Interest rates changing and a bit of a rise in cost of petrol or housing isn’t affecting a 40- or 50-something-year-old.” Qin said she would like to own a home one day, but it looks impossible without help from her parents or a colossal loan. “I’ll probably never be able to afford a house unless I take out a home loan and pass it off to my kids,” she said. “It’s definitely a huge worry.” McCrindle said the trend of students staying at home has a negative knock-on effects for housing affordability and supply. “[Before], parents would downsize into a unit,” he said. “But because their kids might still be there or might be back, they’re not downsizing as much.” That limits the supply of houses, with buyers having to bid for a smaller pool of appropriately sized properties, driving up house prices. While the reduction in the proportion of parents downsizing leaves more apartments free, McCrindle said “young people today can’t afford to move out” — at least, without parental support.
Same problem here in the San Francisco Bay Area. I think it has one of the lowest unemploymnt rates in the US -- 2%. Here you have 3 or 4 people sharing a 2 bedroom flat because the rent is like $4-5K/month. Banks here will give you up to 4X pre-tax salary for mortgage but even then you probably need to $300K+ especially with the SF homes that are going for $1.5M+ that's if can come up with the $300K+ down payment. As far as I can tell the people who buy homes here either have wealthy parents (for down payments) or they worked at these large tech companies that offered stock options via the SRU plans. But with the Nasdaq stocks tanking daily the days of the get rich via SRUs might be over. I'm curious in Australia who owns these mortgages? If people start to default you could problems at the banks. In the US most mortgages aren't even owned by the banks, they just off load them to these government entities who buy regular mortgages I think less than $1M.
The big 4 banks here predominantly, NAB, ANZ, COMMBANK & Westpac. We don't have government involvement with mortgage money, well there is to a minor degree which is like Keystart, operated on a state level, not Fed, they'll offer mortgages to first home buyers & single parents and low income people but only first 3 years.
Best not to have too much government interference. In the US the FNMA (commonly referred to as Fannie Mae) is historical and it goes back to the post-Depression banking & housing collapse. Can you recommend any good books on the economic & political history of Australia? I'm curious to read about it.