Comments on: First Home Buyer Grant working for whom?

By: Sean Allan

Sean Allan — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

The media will not look more critically at blatant spin from developers, investors and speculators in the property industry because of the amount of money it earns through advertising by the very same developers, investors and speculators.

By: RJG

RJG — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

We constantly get the story that house prices are driven by the shortage of land. This is partly true, but if anyone thinks that the cost of building a house has only been the subject of 3% inflation they need to think again. The house I built ten years ago cost $169 K. The same house now costs around $400k. That works out at around 10% inflation. The reason for this is due to supply side constraints. Shortages of trades and building material cost increases. All the home grants do is bid up the costs of a scarce resource. As Dollar Sweetie is the worlds greatest treasurer you would have thought he could have figured that out when he had his hands on the treasury levers.

By: Gozer McAlindon

Gozer McAlindon — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

David Imber may well be right about the effects of the first-home buyer grant on the low income renter. It would have been awesome if he could’ve provided some evidence to back his breathless assertions up. What he says sounds plausible. But it doesn’t give many tools into the hands of those who would like to put questions to the powers that be, asking them to pve the truth of their own boasts.

PS: Sean Allan please do a week in a newsroom before making such a ridiculously assinine statement inputing the ethics of all journalists everywhere.

By: David Chang

David Chang — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Timely article David.

That grant is designed to help nobody except the industry players themselves.

I would n't hold my breath waiting for journalists at the Age newspaper to write anything critical in this regard. Surley the Age takes the prize for being the official organ and flag waver for the realestate industry.

As the honest economists will tell you, and even the honest realestate agents ( is there such a thing ) anyone who got into the market from 2006 on, is heading for grief.

The market should be left alone to go to the place it belongs...South!!! and no amount of propping it up with tax payers money will save it.

By: Ben Aveling

Ben Aveling — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

We were looking for our first house when the first home buyers grant was first introduced; it cost us a packet. Overnight, every 2nd buyer had an extra 7k in their 10% deposit, which meant up to 70k by the time their banks came to the party. As everyone with a basic understanding of buyer behaviour has already guess, we were 7k better off, and several 10s of thousand worse off.

If you actually want to help first home buyers, keep the grant, but pay it after settlement, so that it helps buyers, not sellers.