Yes. And if you go <50km in any direction you can get hundreds of acres for the same thing. We're not stressed for space. We're stressed for infrastructure (and population).
I expected your response, so I want to say that $2M will buy you a great house on decent land, even in Sydney. Not that it's a nice way to spend that much money. Like the rest of the world.
Like an apartment. People don't want to buy a good piece of land outside the city. That doesn't mean we're running out of land.
This is a bit like saying we are not running out of water because there is plenty of water in the ocean. All that space in the middle of nowhere isn’t very useful because people do not want to live 50km away from cities.
No it's not. If you were surrounded by lakes. Sure.
It's extremely useful. It's just not in demand. Which is exactly what I just wrote. Land is not at a premium. Space in the cities is, like every nation around the world.
That's just arguing on semantics and deliberately ignoring the context. No one is arguing that there is literally no land to put a single building on anywhere in the country.
Obviously when people say land is scarce, they mean that the useful land that people actually want to live on is scarce.
Having a billion square km of sand in the desert isn't useful when someone wants to buy a place to live and exist in a society.
Yes. And they're wrong. Land is not scarce. No one is mentioning the "sand". There's more space empty with perfect soil than there is space taken up by residential. The outback has nothing to do with it.
I expected your response, so I want to say that $2M will buy you a great house on decent land, even in Sydney. Not that it's a nice way to spend that much money. Like the rest of the world.
Like an apartment. People don't want to buy a good piece of land outside the city. That doesn't mean we're running out of land.