This JB Hi-Fi Review Tells You Everything You Need To Know About Living In Sydney

Welcome to Sydney. Where one has to choose between smashed avocado and the dream of ultimately owning your own home.

Actually, let's be real here. You're never going to own your own home.

That's why you need The Sims.

For those of us living in Sydney, this review is real. Too real.


Comments

    Couldn't think of anywhere worse in Australia to live....

      I assume you're joking, nobody's that naive.

        Nope. Lived there long enough to know Sydney is a shit place to live. The people, the places, all of it - best experienced in small doses.

    Hahaha, best JB review yet.

    Actually, let's be real here. You're never going to own your own home.

    Let's be even more real; the reality is not just isolated to Sydney.

      It's pretty much every major city, right?

        Everyone complains about baby boomers owning all the property. Surely many of us have them as parents, get them to go guarantor on a loan for you.

          Everyone complains about baby boomers owning all the property.

          I'm not so I don't see how you can even being to make that linkage.

          If someone owns their own home, good on them; they deserve it with all the rights and responsibilities that come with it.

          It is the now and future that doesn't look so good. Land releases are not appropriate and some housing areas become insanely priced thanks to just one shed there selling for 4.3 million at action.

          Surely many of us have them as parents, get them to go guarantor on a loan for you.

          Even if my baby boomer relatives were in that good of a position, that is devaluing them for my own gain.

          What is the point of getting my own home if I didn't obtain it via my own efforts? It devalues the experience.

            Just about every time I've seen housing come up there has been stuff about the baby boomers. You may not have mentioned it but that is the linkage.

          Unless those boomer parents divorced and had to split their resources to buy TWO houses where they'd been living in one. And not only that, but had to buy/sell those houses at a time in history when house prices are well over double the percentage of median income that they were when most boomers bought. In which case, those boomers are in no position to be bailing anyone out. And given divorce rates, that'd means about a third of boomer families.

            Add in that for a lot of boomers, those properties they own are their retirement strategy. They didnt have superannuation until it was way too late to get anything decent, and were told to go build their own wealth.

            Why are people surprised that this is the result?

            If you want to buy, there are always options anyway.

          in other words its impossible to take it out on your own....you either inherit it or you dont own it. AND that doesnt even mention the kind of run down place you have to go for if you dont earn 100k a year. AND you need to stay at home while you save up the deposit...

          Sydney takes out the crown no questions asked. There isnt even any competition. The price towers the closest competitor by 100%.

        Sydney and Melbourne and maybe Brisbane? Canberra is ridiculous. Adelaide and Hobart are ok, and I think Perth is heading back towards some semblance of sanity now that the mining boom has petered out. Then there are regional places outside the big 3 cities - feasible if your employment enables you to work remotely.

          Brisbane is achievable, just live a bit further out. I drive 35 minutes to work and my mortgage is fine

            Brisbane's not too bad - I'm about 20 - 25 mins out from the city on a good day and my mortgage is do-able. If you're ok with living in an apartment, nows the time to buy in Brisbane - oversupply, apartment prices are levelling out or even dropping in a lot of place, and should be that way for the next year or two

    Where one has to choose between smashed avocado and the dream of ultimately owning your own home. You could always live in the Avocado, sort of a James and The Giant Peach type affair.

    Honestly, if you're gullible and lazy enough to pay $22 for smashed avocado on toast, you don't deserve to own a home.
    Either that, or you're rich enough that buying a home shouldn't be a problem ;)

    Last edited 08/11/16 10:38 am

      I'd raise my eyebrows and snort at anything 'on toast' that costs more than ten bucks. Five to ten bucks should get you a decent sandwich. Ten to fifteen bucks for a 'gourmet' one. Anything after that is paying for you and the purveyor to jerk each other off about how hip and trendy you each are.

      Last edited 08/11/16 11:36 am

    Take a look at prices in major Chinese cities.... Makes Sydney look like an absolute bar-jane.

    Most of us live untouched by war, poverty, disaster etc. Sure buying a house is expensive, but that's because everyone wants to live in the expensive areas. Few things makes more sense than the basic concept of supply and demand.

      Well. Supply and demand is a very nice theory and all, but it's complicated by the injection of wealthy capital taking advantage of supply/demand-altering effects like tax breaks.

      There are restrictions on how many apartments in new complexes can be sold overseas for investment purposes, but real estate agents are finding ways around it to maximize investment.

      Conservative politicians like to cite increasing supply as a means to meet demand for home-ownership, but the fact is that it doesn't matter how much supply you create if all of that supply gets snapped up by investors with greater capital, willing to pay higher prices to secure a tax break and a ticking investment/earner, then rent that supply to the hungry demand who simply can't afford as much to become home-owners.

      So the whole, 'just build more housing' argument doesn't work. Real reform is needed to make housing less attractive as investment, so that the wealthy investors can't snap up all the new supply and charge it back to the less well-off who they want to keep as renters without equity. Sadly, there's no political will to do this, because it's not in the interests of wealthy donors who happen to be investors to lose the value of their investments.

      For some reason this is seen as worse than the plummeting home-ownership/rent-slavery state that we've devolved to. Basic 'supply and demand' isn't relevant to the current housing debacle in the slightest.

        Good reply, super interesting - I don't know enough to offer much in response! But really, i just referenced supply and demand in the sense that houses close to the largest city in Australia are obviously going to cost a packet because everyone wants them.

        You can buy land an hour from Adelaide for a couple hundred grand and build a nice house for about the same again. $400k. Most couples could pay that off in 10 years.

        Your comment about housing being such an attractive investment is a really great point.

        Last edited 08/11/16 1:40 pm

        Issue with housing is that there are so many things that go into why its a problem, that nobody can agree on what the problem is.

        Its supply and demand.
        Its negative gearing.
        Its CGT.
        Its boomers.
        Its foreign investment...

        See the drama? ALL of them play their part, along with developers, mum and dad investors, and a whole range of other things, all combining to make it the problem it is. Changing one of those "issues" only makes it easier for another group to buy anyway, and still price FHO's out of the market.

        Negative gearing gets put up as a problem all the time, but its just one of those dramas. And frankly, if you get rid of it, all you're doing is taking one way (to me, one of the better ways) for first home owners to get into the market. Those with existing assets already generate enough income to keep going as they are, they wont care.

        I'd take negative gearing though, and make it capital in nature. The losses from that negative gearing can only be applied against gains, so they either have to positively gear the property long enough to balance the books, or make enough on the sale to do the same.

        But there is no easy answer. Well, there is, but even Sims 4 has its dramas - its doing its own bit to make its inhabitants obese...

      you dont know what you are talking about. there is no cheap suburb in sydney. the expensive suburbs apartment cost close to 1 mil...

      major chinese cities...they population compared to ours? and I didnt know I live in china. Our rental and property prices wow'd people in america...its apparently comparable to their resort towns which are suppose to be very expensive.

      either way the point is...it shot up 100% and more in a very short time. if you didnt get in early you missed out. its now an inheritance thing mainly.

        It seems its YOU that done know what they're talking about, at least when it comes to Sydney prices. Are you just spouting what the MSM keeps repeating, about how median prices are ~$1m?

        Go to realestate.com.au and filter for properties under $500k, and there are plenty around - keep filtering down from that amount, I found one place for $350k in 5 minutes.

        Thing with median price is that its the average, which means there are roughly as many under that amount as over. If the median price is $1m, for every place costing $1.5m, theres a place costing $500k.

        They're out there, people just make excuses not to invest because they think its harder than it is.

        Heres one for you: http://www.realestate.com.au/property-unit-nsw-liverpool-122850598 - price of $380k

        From first hand experience. you only need $20k-$30k and you're adding $100k to the value, or more. But the excuse is that its too far from work, or something else. Which is just that, an exuse.

        My point is simple. If you want to get into property, there is ALWAYS an option. If you want to find excuses not to, you will always find a reason not to. Its up to you to decide whether you want to do something about it, or whinge.

    I'm 29 and own my own home in Marrickville. My missus has almost $200k in her savings. l2p and git gud.

      so your missus owns a home and has 200k.

      Silver spoon in mouth, what are you doing on here? LOL

      ye... you have a home...thats all good...

      you want to tell me when you bought it and the price and ill tell you what kind of home you have....

      and 200k savings with no other investment is super stupid...cash in bank is the worst investment option...what you say has so many problems...you for real or a spoiled brat?

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now