Am reading the book "How to Achieve Wealth for Life". One of the things they say is:
The Wealth for Life Strategy works in areas where property prices increase over time. For this one factor to be true, we apply the following factors:
The areas where people need and want to live will be in demand.
…and there are two others, but this is the one I wish to focus on.
With the hike in property prices, many people cannot choose where they want to live, so this statement to me is somewhat debatable. It is often stated within a radius of 10 – 15 km of the city is a good place to invest. I assume many people have little choice and are saying, "I can't afford that, therefore I'll have to live further out."
It is a fact salaries and wages aren't keeping pace with house prices. I make very good money in my job and am in an ideal position to buy property, but I draw the line on some of the asking prices.
I'm looking for thoughts on how this might play out with newer developments further out of the city. One might reasonably assume these outer suburbs will have demand because of the unaffordability of inner city living, i.e. there is no choice but to look further out. How do you see the demand for outer suburbs, based on the affordability issue I've discussed here? Thanks.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
