MB Fund Podcast: Australia’s housing market dilemma with Martin North

In today’s latest webinar and podcast, hear from MB Fund’s Head of Investment Damien Klassen, Tim Fuller and founder of Digital Finance Analytics, Martin North as they cover “Australia’s Housing Market Dilemma”

Topics include an overview of the Australian Housing market with a rebuttal to the property bull case, banking regulation and government policy towards housing, Australia’s domestic and international economic outlook, and a discussion on where housing development sits currently

Take us on your daily commute! Podcasts now available on iTunes and all major Android Podcast Platforms for Nucleus Insights.

Subscribe on Android

Subscribe on itunes
Subscribe on Spotify
Subscribe on Google Podcasts


Tim Fuller is Head of Operations at the MacroBusiness Fund, which is powered by Nucleus Wealth.

The information on this blog contains general information and does not take into account your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. Past performance is not an indication of future performance. Tim Fuller is an authorised representative of Nucleus Wealth Management, a Corporate Authorised Representative of Nucleus Advice Pty Ltd – AFSL 515796.


  1. I don’t think its about keeping the economy healthy. It really is just about keeping assets > liabilities for Australia. If houses go down a decent amount then Australian’s with our record household debt are effectively insolvent. A sluggish economy to the decision makers would be better than a crashing one.

    • +1
      The ‘sluggish economy’ speaks to Ray Dalio’s ‘beautiful deleveraging’ theory where a private sector collapse is counterbalanced by a combination of fiscal stimulus and money printing (central bank funding of Govt) – just enough to keep the economy from sinking beneath the waves while the private sector deleverages.

      (As an aside, RD has since rejected this theory as workable …. a sensible move IMO).

    • Jumping jack flash

      Not only that but consider that the assets are only worth as much as the last pile of debt attached to them.

      Also consider the role of interest and where it can possibly be extracted from when the asset attached to the debt isn’t inherently productive.

      It’s a frightening thought in itself, but spare a thought for the poor bankers and RBA who must be literally crapping themselves wondering how they’re going to keep the debt growing forever and fast enough to enable the payment of the last load of interest to prevent a total collapse.

      Interesting solution that the government essentially pays everyone’s debt, or at least the interest, for them… I can see how that would certainly benefit those who were fooled into taking on enormous debt piles but what about those who didn’t? Would they get their “helicopter money” too?

      • Bankers don’t think like you are suggesting.
        They are solely focused on the next deal and the next bonus.
        Everything longer than that time frame is absolutely irrelevant.
        They are a lovely bunch….

    • The Ponzi falls apart when a significant portion of the asset owners retire and try to downsize all at once, lots of them are carrying [email protected] of debt too. Given the weight of boomer numbers and the younger generation’s gig/casual employment status makes them look like bad risks , shit is going to get fuck1ng serious soon. Ok Boomer? No they’re not and neither are the rest of us.