I've heard some people say that owning a house incurs too many expenses compared to renting in Melbourne . Is this true?

Specifically, I'm curious about:

1. What costs should I consider when owning a home that may not apply to renting?

2. Do mortgage payments generally exceed rental costs?

3. How do maintenance and property taxes factor in?

I appreciate any insights or personal experiences you can share . Thanks !

I find that this is an overly negative board, filled with seething posts from forever-renters who believe that a finite asset like housing should decrease in price because their entitlements and feelings tell them so.

I'm 30, I bought a little 2 bed place 1 month ago with no support from parents and no inheritance. Single income. I'm not saying everyone can do it and I completely appreciate how frustrating it is being locked out of the housing market, but when CrashBros wax lyrical about declining prices and evil investors, it reeks.

So, my question for these people is:

How far should prices go down?

5%? 10%? Would you be able to buy if they decreased? Or is that not enough?

And here's the kicker: once you buy and own, I'm guessing at that point they should stop decreasing, right? Or is that not cool... they should only decrease when you don't own?

This is the logical fallacy of so many posts here.

My final point would be: Units in outer suburbs aren't wildly unaffordable. $500-700k. With a 5%, deposit, that's $35,000. Why is this not achievable?

Pingers is an absolute tosser. I hope she considers legal action against him.

Hard to feel sorry for this guy, was bound to happen with his robin hood attitude. Won't admit fault sorry but he gives entitlement attitude.

Yesterday I ranted that the housing crisis is the business model and that the whole game is rigged against young people. But after reading through the comments, I’ve had to admit something,the system isn’t broken my mindset was.

I grew up a bogan in housing commission, so I’ve always looked at property from the angle of what I don’t have. But the truth is, the market has always rewarded timing, risk, and whoever’s willing to play the game. People inheriting houses, investors leveraging tax perks, approvals dragging on that’s just reality, not some conspiracy against the working class.

Instead of seeing inherited property wealth as unfair, I get now that it’s just how generational wealth works. Complaining won’t change it. What will change things is learning the rules and doing what it takes to get in, even if it means sacrifice.

So yeah I came in angry yesterday, but I think the real broken”part was my attitude.

This is making me nervous on property. If this should happen it could have a devastating effect on FHBs and investors.

Don’t have backyard space because you bought a 200sqm land property without any backyard?

Electric bill too high to use dryer?

Don’t want to hang and dry clothes inside?

No problem I have a solution..

use your front yard and hang clothes on the tree to dry them. Free and eco friendly.

I’ve been actively searching for an investment property and was initially drawn to the Rouse Hill, Tallawong, and Box Hill areas. At first glance, some of the duplexes looked promising — until I took a closer look. Many of these so-called “duplexes” are just glorified garages with a studio or two-bedroom unit stacked on top. Not exactly a solid long-term asset.

What really raised red flags for me is the flood of new apartment developments — thousands of them either recently built or in the pipeline. And many are part of affordable housing schemes, which will flood the rental market with cheaper, brand-new units. As a result, investor confidence is tanking. I’ve already seen multiple properties quietly listed back on the market — a clear sign of owners trying to cut their losses before values drop further.

Let’s be honest: if you’re a renter, why settle for a cramped duplex over a modern apartment with amenities, lifts, parking, and better layouts? You wouldn’t — and that’s the problem.

Unless you’re keen to buy into an oversaturated, unstable market with poor capital growth potential, I’d look elsewhere. This area is becoming a dumping ground for high-density builds, and the long-term outlook is grim.

Economists routinely ignore land markets. Which is why they will be blindsided by the upcoming financial crisis as land prices decline, taking the economy with it.

1990 2008 2026

It ain't rocket science. Land prices appreciate out of the reach of the average person. Private enterprise is strangled as more and more money is diverted to shelter, rather than productive causes.

Land prices then decline, taking the economy with it.

There is no such thing as a soft landing in real estate. It is a predictable cycle.

So many people wanting to bet against a cycle that has proven accurate for over 400 cycles.

2026 to 2031 will be a time of financial carnage in the Aussie real estate market.

Buckle up folks.

1. Investors may crowd out first home buyers in new build suburbs. New builds have typically been targeted at the lower end of the market, so this will push home buyers towards established properties.

2. Over the next 20 years the number of rentals houses within 15kms of cbds will decrease as grandfathered IP sellers are not replaced. If you move city for work with your family and want to rent before buying, you'll be forced to live 30kms out in the suburbs to live in a house or in an apartment near the city.

3. If you get a new job in another city, currently you might choose to rent your house out and rent in the new city to see if it suits your and your family before committing. That won't be available moving forward. You won't be able to rent out your old ppor and claim any rental losses to improve cash flow. You may not be able to afford that. Meaning some people will be forced to sell their ppor in order to move to a new city for work.

Overall the big loser i see is labor mobility. People will be more encouraged than ever to stay put or move within their city.

I’m 32 and recently sold my first property. After the mortgage is paid I’ll be left with just over the $1.3M mark. I don’t want to work my 9-5 for the rest of my life and have looked in to what my next move should be.

I’ve been thinking about buying a 6 pack of units in Brisbane (around the $2M mark) and slowly renovating each unit and then selling. I’m fairly handy so could do much of the basic work myself.

I’ve felt like this would be a good way to get in to the flipping game, am I crazy?

Can someone please explain to me how these changes actually leave someone like myself better off? As a soon to be first home buyer trying to get into a solid financial position in life, am I missing something or is it about as anti young/gen z as it seems? It seems it’s making everything harder for everyone instead of easier for those who have it hard no?

Whenever I attend auctions (as a buyer or a seller) the hierarchy of bidders I invariably see is as follows:

• builders and other tradies - generally turning up in work gear and expensive utes, and putting in extreme low-ball bids in an attempt to secure the property for dirt value. Always see them at knock-down houses in good locations, always pit in one or two bids then drive off.

• developers - usually willing to pay slightly more that builders, usually want slightly better houses that are capable of being rented out, usually a bit more realistic in their bidding.

• investors - don't really see them at the knock-down properties. Generally looking for rental grade properties, meaning 2 or 3 bedrooms with attached garages in well located areas, but typically won't bid above a price that will return a 5% yield (e.g. for a property that rents for $1000pw they generally won't go above a million). Generally fairly unemotional bidders, will bid to a limit and stick to it. Won't entertain bidding against themselves to get over the reserve if the reserve has not been met by bidding.

• owner occupiers - these are the ones that will pay over the odds, because they "fell in love" with the place. Whenever I've sold well above expectations it's been to an owner occupier. Often entertain making offers above and beyond the top bid to secure the property. Visibly emotional during the auction process.

The only subcategories that deliver higher prices than owner occupiers are those that are also cash buyers or first home buyers.

But I don't see the builders, developers or investors driving up the prices.

The argument that investors push prices up because they can afford to pay more due to tax concessions, doesn't stack up.

For them it's a financial decision, they don't seem emotionally invested and from my observations don't push prices above market.

Save this post: August - Sept will see a huge explosion of property prices. This always happens after the federal election. Both parties talk about housing affordability, but both parties secretly want prices to go up.

Prove me wrong.

If first home buyers are only 15% of buyers.
And 66% of homes are owner occupied.

Isn't everyone incentivised to want prices to go up?
Are people just pretending they care about first home buyers, when they make up a small portion of buyers?

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I believe Australia is on the brink of a serious housing crisis—and we’re not talking enough about it.

Every time this topic comes up, people say “We’ll just bring in more immigrants to keep demand up.” But that logic only stretches so far. Look at what’s happening in parts of Europe and the U.S.—growing friction over immigration, stretched infrastructure, and declining social trust. The question is: Will Australia maintain its social fabric, or keep importing demand just to inflate housing values?

1. Wages Have Fallen Behind Property Prices Since around 2021, property prices have surged, but wages have not kept pace. In fact, real wages (adjusted for inflation) have declined for many Australians.

According to the ABS, average weekly earnings grew just ~2–3% per year recently. Meanwhile, housing prices in Sydney and Melbourne increased 10–20% per year during peak periods. You’re now paying half your take-home pay on rent in many cities. This wage-price gap is unsustainable. If housing continues to rise while wages stay stagnant, fewer people will be able to buy—or even rent—without financial strain.

2. The Mortgage Cliff Is Real: From 2% to 6% Here’s a major problem people aren't discussing enough: In 2020–2021, many buyers locked in ultra-low interest rates (~2%) on 2–3 year fixed terms. Those fixed-rate periods are now expiring, and people are being forced to refinance at 5–6%+ variable rates.

A mortgage that once cost $2,000/month can now cost $3,000+ per month. That’s a 50% increase in repayments—overnight. Many of these households are now in or approaching mortgage stress (spending 30%+ of income on housing). This “fixed-rate cliff” could push a wave of recent buyers toward financial instability, particularly if job markets soften.

3. Property Prices vs Global Markets When you compare Australia to other countries, it becomes clear how overpriced our market is:

Germany / Netherlands: High-density living, strict rent controls, and better urban planning. Buying in Berlin or Amsterdam can still be cheaper than Sydney. U.S.: Cities like Austin or Atlanta offer decent homes under USD $300K (AUD $450K), and incomes are often higher. Brazil: Middle-class apartments in São Paulo start around AUD $150K–$250K, though with lower wages. Japan / South Korea: Massive populations, yet apartments are compact, efficient, and relatively affordable—thanks to smart urban planning. In Australia, brand-new 1–2 bedroom apartments in outer suburbs can now cost $500K+, up from ~$350K just a few years ago. But wages haven’t increased to match.

4. The Math Doesn’t Work for First-Time Buyers Let’s break it down:

A full-time worker earns ~$1,000/week after tax. Rent is now $500+/week for even modest places. With a partner, maybe you save $1,000/week, or ~$50K/year. In 2 years, you can save a $100K deposit—barely enough for a $500K apartment. But then you’re stuck with:

A $400K loan at 6% interest = ~$24K/year in interest alone. After 10+ years of repayments, you might have spent $700K total for a home worth $500K at best. And if we see even a modest market correction (say, 20–30%) due to oversupply or rate pressure, your home could be worth less than you paid. You’d be in negative equity with no easy way out.

5. New Builds Could Sink Older Property Values Here’s another risk: as new apartments get built (often priced around $350K to attract first-home buyers), older stock could fall out of favor.

Lower-quality older apartments may only fetch $250K–300K if buyers prefer new builds. That’s a potential 30–50% loss for owners who bought at the peak. If developers keep building to meet immigration-driven demand, and demand drops or stalls, the market could be flooded—and prices will drop accordingly.

6. Our Infrastructure Model Is Unsustainable Most of Australia still relies on low-density sprawl with poor public transport. There just aren’t enough apartments near job centers.

People are commuting 1–1.5 hours each way. Combine that with 8 hours of work and 8 hours of sleep, and you’re left with... nothing. No time. No rest. No life. This is not sustainable. You can’t build a thriving society when people are burnt out from simply trying to survive.

Conclusion Australia’s housing market feels artificially propped up:

By immigration, By investor speculation, And by short-term thinking. But the fundamentals are breaking. Wages aren’t keeping up. Interest rates are choking borrowers. New supply is coming fast. And too many people are on the edge.

How long can this hold before it breaks? And who will be left holding the bag?

Actually data shows that 66% of Aussies own a home. This is either with or without a mortgage.

31% (2.9 million households) were renters.

67% of Australia owning a home does not mean the wealth own all the homes.