The thing that infuriates me about these commentards is their inability to grasp the simple concept that if demand exceeds supply then there needs to be some mechanism for deciding who gets to own a property, the most obvious of which is who has the most money.
The only practical solutions are to rebalance supply and demand, for instance:
- Increase supply by making land cheaper (rezoning) AND reducing state costs on new housing (reducing state costs alone will just increase land prices)
- Encourage people to move out of the big three cities (e.g. mass relocation of social tenants, huge tax incentives for businesses relocating)
- Disincentivise landlording through taxation changes (this has been partially done already, I think, although the CGT exemption period hasn’t ended)
- Disincentivise landlording through regulation changes (e.g. removal of the right evict to sell or house family, enforcing standards of rental accomodation)
- Remove all unreasonable limits on repossession, to encourage unencumbered banks to enter the market and reduce interest rates
But no, the commentards instead rail on the one aspect that makes the square root of fuck all difference to supply and demand, and that’s the CB regs.