How will finding more subcontractors free up the majority of stock AV Jennings has that is being held in limbo by government bureaucracy?
But it’s not being held up by bureaucrats, that’s the point. Thats just the convenient line they spin to always blame government.
When AV Jennings can’t complete 10% of the approved lots that are in their current pipeline it’s not “bureaucracy” that is slowing it down!
Do you have any idea of the costs involved in preparing Greenfield land for development?
Water
Power
Stormwater
Sewage
Communication
Roads
Amenities
Etc.
None of that is cheap. None of that happens without the councils (referring back to the data you provided)....zoning and permitting.
Yes there are substantial costs involved with greenfield sites and those costs used to be borne by the government (who owned and provided all those services). The government also sold the land (with assistance from the RE sector to do the auction) so they recouped the money paid for the services.
They also had a pretty decent incentive to sell the land quickly as they would get more ratepayers into their jurisdiction if they sold more blocks of land to build houses on.
Now the costs for all the infrastructure are foisted onto the private developers even though the governments get the ongoing rates that are supposed to be paying for those services. Creates a disconnect between the action and the ongoing benefits.
Because one derives a benefit. The other does not. Just like the money you spend on your solar. Do you consider that to be an investment or simply a cost? I'll make it easy for you...you invested money into the panels to reap a benefit from them.
Buying a car derives a benefit as well, not having to walk to work is a pretty solid benefit but that’s not (generally) considered an investment is it?
Also using solar panels as an example isn’t really the same. Solar panels
do provide an economic return (energy) that has
actual ongoing value, either through using the energy yourself or selling it to the power grid.
A carport derives effectively no economic benefit to me, it just makes my car cooler when I hop in it in summer and stops it from deteriorating as quick in the sun. Also reduces the risk from hail storms and such so possibly a minor decrease in insurance premiums and thats it.
So the carport is actually a net economic
negative for the economy as a whole as my car is better protected so I’m less likely to spend money on it in the future getting it repainted or repaired due to UV or hail damage!
It's an entirely frustrating situation. Bulk immigration to try and stave off technical recession or to try and fix a housing issue that is in part being driven by that immigration is like running around on a never ending hamster wheel.
Eventually somebody needs to call time and put a pause on the excess immigration above what our industries can service for a period until a more sustainable model is decided on.
Agreed. The government should stop this BS of importing more people than our housing and infrastructure can keep up with.
I still think importing the extra workers we currently require to build houses is a net positive for housing though as they will build more houses than they occupy.
Realistically immigration rates should get back to the 100-120k it was before John Howard started the big Australia policy that has been enthusiastically taken up by the Labor Party as well.
The LNP/Labor duopoly really are basically identical in all the actions that matter and the MSM constantly hammer the points that don’t matter at all to try and keep up the appearance that there is a difference between them. Both major parties sell out Australia for the lowest possible price.
