Is Mass Immigration Destroying Housing? Foreign Corps Pay Zero Tax & Pocock's Gambling Showdown

Sign up to the Punter Times Newsletter  https://www.punterspolitics.com/pages/email-sign-up

This week, Konrad and James expose how foreign corporations like Shell made $127 billion in Australia while paying virtually zero tax, reveal the governments hidden gambling connections, and host the first-ever Puntermon Battle between two economists who can't agree whether mass immigration or property speculation is destroying Australia's housing market. Featuring - Economists Leith van Onselen & Matt Grudnoff 

Punter’s Politics Political Fundraiser Tickets: https://www.punterspolitics.com/pages/punters-political-fundraising-dinner
Be a dark money funder to help hire a lobbyist for the punters: https://chuffed.org/project/134297-fund-australias-first-punter-powered-lobbyist

Leith's Notes
"The first chart in this article shows why demand side policies never work as they just feed higher home prices:" https://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2025/05/australians-snookered-by-mega-mortgages/
"Even if we changed NG and the CGT discount today it wouldn't do squat for the rental market as the volume of migration would continue to overwhelm supply, driving vacancy rates lower and rents higher. Sure, building public housing would help and is worthwhile. But that would cost many billions and would merely be taken up by new migrants (this is happening now in Melbourne). We simply cannot build enough homes or infrastructure to keep up with demand. We don't have the capacity. Therefore, the only solution is to go back to pre 2005 levels of migration and ensure that it is focused on skills the country actually needs. We need quality, not quantity. As long as policymakers continue to pump immigration, the rental and infrastructure crises will continue. Nothing can be done on the supply side in any reasonable timeframe to change this fact.

Matt's Notes

I claimed that over the last 10 years the population has increased by 16% but the number of dwellings has increased by 19%
Population data comes from National, state and territory population. Click on the “Population and components of change – national” towards the bottom of the webpage. In the spreadsheet that downloads we are looking for “Estimated Resident Population (ERP) ;  Australia” (this is column L in the spreadsheet). 10 years comes from March 2015 to March 2025. The numbers are population in March 2015: 23,745,600. Population in March 2025: 27,536,900. The formular for calculating the percentage increase is (Mar-2025 – Mar-2015)/Mar-2015.
Dwellings data comes from Total Value of Dwellings. Click on “Table 1. Total value of dwellings, all series” towards the bottom of the webpage. In the spreadsheet that downloads we are looking for “Number of residential dwellings; Australia” (this is Column AT in the spreadsheet). 10 years comes from the increase from March 2015 to March 2025. The numbers are dwellings in March 2015: 9,511,300. Dwellings in March 2025: 11,320,300.
The quarterly dwellings data only goes back to Sep-2011. But the housing crisis really started in the early 2000s. So, to go back further I use census data. If you compare the 2001 census with the 2021 census (latest census), population has increased 33% and dwellings have increased 39%.
Population and dwelling data for the 2001 census comes from 2022.0 – Census of Population and Housing: Classification Counts, Australia, 2001. In the downloads tab click on the first data cube “Australia Classification Counts 2001”.
Click on the first spreadsheet called “Aust_Age.xls”. This has the population number at D110 in the spreadsheet. The population is 18,972,350.
Click on the 14th spreadsheet is called “Aust_Dwelling Location.xls”. It has the dwelling number at B15 in the spreadsheet. The number of dwellings is 7,810,352.
Population data for the 2021 census comes from Population; Census. At the bottom of the webpage click on “Data table for population data summary”. The population is 25,422,788 (D20 in Table 1 of the spreadsheet).
Dwelling data for the 2021 census comes from Housing: Census. At the bottom of the webpage click on “Data table for Housing data summary”. The number of dwellings is 10,875,248 (J17 in Table 1 of the spreadsheet).
You now have the population from both 2001 census (18,972,350) and the 2025 census (25,422,788). You also have the number of dwellings from the 2001 census (7,810,352) and the 2025 census (10,875,248).
Rent and general inflation figures all come from the Consumer Price Index, Australia.
I claimed over the last 10 years general inflation (CPI) had increased 33%, while rents had increased 24%.
Both figures come from the bottom of the webpage at the CPI website linked above, called “Table 7. CPI: Group, Sub-group and Expenditure Class, Weighted Average of Eight Capital Cities”.
The rent numbers come from “Index Numbers; Rents; Australia” (column BC in tab Data1). I actually compared Mar-2015 (109.2) to Jun-2025 (133.7). This gives a 24% increase. But to compare with the dwelling data I should have compared March-2015 (109.2) to Mar-2025 (133.7). This reduces the increase to 22%. But as I was arguing that rent prices hadn’t increased as much, this helps my point.
The general inflation numbers come from the same spreadsheet as the rent numbers but are at “Index Numbers; All groups CPI; Australia” (column EC in tab Data1). Again, I compared Mar-2015 (106.8) to Jun-2025 (141.7) to get 33%. But I should have compared Mar-2015 (106.8) with Mar-2025 (140.7), which would give 32%.
I also claimed that over 25 years general inflation (CPI) had increased 103%, while rents had increased 115%.
These figures are from the same columns as the rent (BC in tab Data1) and all groups CPI (EC in tab Data1) data from above. Except instead of comparing 10 years, I went back to Mar-2000 (62.7 for Rent and 69.7 for CPI) and then compared this with Jun-2025 (135.0 for rent and 141.7 for CPI). Again, for consistency I should have compared them both with Mar-2025. This would have meant the general inflation increase would have been 102% (rather than 103%), and the rent increase would have been 113% (rather than 115%). This doesn’t make any difference to the points I was making.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.