Even the experts can’t agree on whether there is a housing bubble — so what hope do the masses have? Over the past week, one of Australia’s leading housing experts pointed out that there was potentially 400,000 homes that may hit the market later this year. Another claimed that there wasn’t a bubble at all, the Reserve Bank constantly disputes the notion of a bubble while The Economist dubbed the Australian property market “the most overvalued” of the 20 it studied.

SQM Research chief Louis Christopher noted last week that “by the time we get to spring, there will be 350,000 to 370,000 properties on the market nationally [and] when you see a fall in volume and a rise in listings, it means one thing — vendors are struggling to sell their property”.

Christopher’s views appear to be borne out in rapidly dropping clearance rates — especially in Melbourne, Australia’s auction capital, which has seen clearance rates fall from more than 80%t throughout 2009 to only 55% now. (The Real Estate Institute of Victoria is still claiming the clearance rate is more than 70%, largely because it doesn’t bother to include non-reported auctions. Of course, taking advice from the Real Estate Institute is a bit like asking a car salesman when it’s time to buy a new car).

Banking analyst Brian Johnson, of CSLA, took a similar bearish view, noting to clients that “on any measure, the dramatic rise [in house prices] has been fuelled by a dramatic increase in household gearing tolerance on a variable interest rate product in a low interest rate environment — and Australia’s housing prices look irrational on most metrics”.

Not everyone agrees though — perhaps worryingly, the RBA’s Luci Ellis, who is responsible for financial stability of all things, claimed that “recent data suggests we do not have a credit fuelled speculative boom on our hands”.

Ellis may not be looking at the same data as Steve Keen (who shrewdly notes the increase in mortgage debt to GDP, among other measures) or the Economist, which claimed Australian property is the most expensive in the world, based on a comparison of average-prices and rents. Or even NAB’s Joseph Healy, who pointed out that the flow of money into housing might be causing “asset bubbles”.

This is not altogether different to what Crikey pointed out last week — that the cost difference between renting the median home and buying a median priced home is extraordinary. In fact, when maintenance, depreciation and other costs of ownership are factored in, it costs more than double to own the average home than to rent one.

The Economist noted that Australia’s house price growth in 2009-10 of 20% was the third highest of the countries it considered. Since 1997, Australian median prices have risen by 211% — second only to South Africa (which was in the process of an economic expansion after the end of its apartheid system). In fact, since 1997, Australia’s house price growth is double that of the US, more than six times the rate of Switzerland and triple the increase experienced in Canada (which, like Australia, has benefited from the commodities boom).

No need to be concerned though — even though most credible (and non-interested) housing commentators (and the majority of investors) now believe that a housing bubble exists, the organisation responsible for setting monetary policy in Australia remains in a state of bliss.