Lockdown

The extended lockdown across greater Sydney could be the catalyst for another Australian recession, according to experts surveyed in this month&rsquo;s Finder RBA Cash Rate Survey.&nbsp;

All 40 experts and economists that weigh&nbsp;in on future cash rate moves and other issues relating to the state of the economy, expect&nbsp;a rate hold for this month.

With greater Sydney set to be in lockdown until at least the end of August, the majority of experts who weighed in* (63%, 19/30) believe that the lockdowns could see Australia enter another recession.&nbsp;

Nearly 2 in 5 (38%, 8/21) of economists think that it could take as little as another two months in lockdown for the recession to hit.&nbsp;

Graham Cooke, head of consumer research at Finder, said all eyes will be on the length of Sydney&rsquo;s lockdown.

Close to half of respondents who responded (43%, 12) think that Australia&rsquo;s response to the pandemic has hurt its international reputation.&nbsp;

[smartcode_project:default project_id=7363 project_image_fid=41840]

Uncertainty returns for employment and wage growth&nbsp;

While positivity towards both wage growth and employment surged in July, August saw both of these economic indicators dip significantly.&nbsp;

Cooke said it was no surprise that the latest Covid developments had driven sentiment into the ground.&nbsp;

&ldquo;Last month, we saw positivity towards wage growth spike to its highest point since our survey began. While this has seen a sharp decrease, it&rsquo;s employment that&rsquo;s seen the biggest dip, dropping from 71% in July to 29% in August.&quot;

&ldquo;Positive economic sentiment overall has dropped to 14% in August, down from 28% last month,&rdquo; Cooke added.&nbsp;

All 40 experts and economists surveyed expect a rate hold for this month.

jordan_55689

Experts warn extended Sydney lockdown could lead to another recession: Finder

<html><body>
Winter may be setting in but lockdown restrictions are continuing to thaw, leading to a rise in auction numbers for this second weekend of June, according to CoreLogic data.
There are 1,179 capital city auctions being tracked by CoreLogic this week, increasing on the 711 auctions last week.
While volumes are expected to be the highest we’ve seen since mid-April, auction activity remains lower than what we would usually see, with 1,505 auctions held over the same week one year ago.
There are 561 Sydney homes scheduled for auction this week, up on the 398 held last week according to final figures, and higher than the 534 held one year ago.
In Melbourne, 467 auctions are scheduled across the city this week, increasing on the 195 auctions last week, however lower than volumes from the same week last year 724.
Across the smaller markets, scheduled volumes are set to remain steady across Perth, while the remaining cities are all expected to see a rise in activity over the week.
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/2020/6/9/CL%20June%2011.JPG" alt="">
The Ray White Surry Hills | Alexandria | Glebe | Erskineville office is heading into the weekend with eight homes going under the hammer on-site.
Examining some highlights, Director Ercan Ersan said the converted warehouse apartment at C80/240 Wyndham St, Alexandria in The Hudson has had 100 groups through and 30 contracts given out.
“It’s the epitome of luxury inner city living designed by the celebrated architects at Allen Jack+Cottier,” Mr Ersan said.
“We’re expecting between 10 and 15 registered bidders and it should break the building record.”
Another standout is 4/11-33 Maddison St (pictured in title) in Redfern with Mr Ersan saying the apartment has one of the best renovations he’s seen.
“We’ve already got five people coming to the auction and it should sell at $1.4 million,” he said.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Soaring Winter auction volumes as lockdown restrictions thaw

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
As Australia begins to relax its COVID-19 restrictions there is understandable debate about how quickly that should proceed, and whether lockdowns even made sense in Australia in the first place.
The sceptics arguing for more rapid relaxation of containment measures point to the economic costs of lockdowns and appeal to the cold calculus of <a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cost-benefitanalysis.asp" target="_blank">cost-benefit analysis</a> to conclude that the lives saved by lockdowns don’t justify the economic costs incurred to do so.
Their numbers don’t stack up.
To be able to weigh the value of a life against the economic costs of forgone output from lost jobs and business closures, requires placing a dollar value on one person’s life. This number is called the value of a statistical life.
In Australia, the Government generally uses a value of A$<a href="https://www.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/publications/Value_of_Statistical_Life_guidance_note.pdf" target="_blank">4.9 million</a>. The United States uses a value of <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2017-value-of-life/" target="_blank">US$10 million</a>.
What are the benefits of the shutdown? This is the value of lives saved plus any indirect economic or health benefits. Lives saved are those excess lives that would be lost if government relied on a strategy that allowed enough people to get infected to result in so-called <a href="https://www.webmd.com/lung/what-is-herd-immunity#1" target="_blank">herd immunity</a>.
How many extra lives would be lost under this second strategy?
To answer this, we need assumptions about the virus.
<h2>The lives lost if we let it rip</h2>
The <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/23/world/europe/coronavirus-R0-explainer?referringSource=articleShare" target="_blank">initial reproduction rate</a> of the virus, R0, was thought to be about 2.5. This means that every 2 people infected were likely to infect another 5; producing an average infection rate per person of 2.5.
Herd immunity for COVID-19 is estimated to require roughly 60% of the population be infected before the <a href="https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-flatten-the-curve" target="_blank">curve begins to flatten</a> and the peak infections fall.
This happens when the reproduction rate, R0, falls below one. Because of subsequent new infections, the total number infected over the course of the pandemic is closer to 90%.
Given a population of 25 million people and assuming a fatality rate of 1%, this would produce 225,000 deaths.
An assumption of a 1% fatality rate is low from the perspective of those making decisions at the onset of the pandemic, at a time when crucial and reliable data were missing.
<h2>Those lives are valued at $1.1 trillion</h2>
Converting those fatalities to dollars using the Australian value of a statistical life of A$4.9 million per life yields a cost of A$1.1 trillion.
In rough terms, that’s the amount we have gained by shutting down the economy, provided deaths do not skyrocket when lockdown measures are relaxed and borders re-open.
It is about three fifths of one year’s gross domestic product, which is about A$1.9 trillion.
What are the costs of the shutdown?
These are the direct economic costs from reduced economic activity plus the indirect social, medical, and economic costs, all measured in terms of national income.
A starting point is to take the lost income that occurs from the recession that has probably already begun.
<h2>What will the shutdown cost?</h2>
Let’s assume that the downturn results in a 10% drop in gross domestic product over 2020 and 2021 – about $180 billion – consistent with IMF forecasts of a fall in GDP of 6.7% in 2020 and a sharp rebound of 6.1% growth in 2021, and comparable to the Reserve Bank of Australia’s forecasts in the latest <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/smp/2020/may/" target="_blank">Statement on Monetary Policy</a>.
Comparing this cost from shutting down – about $180 billion – to the benefit of $1,103 billion – makes the case for shutdown clear.
But this calculation grossly overestimates the costs of the shutdown.
The recession is a consequence of both the shutdown and the pandemic.
We need to attribute costs to each.
Most of the economic costs of the recession are likely to be due to the pandemic itself rather the shutdown.
<h2>Many costs would have been borne anyway</h2>
Even before the shutdown, economic activity was in decline.
Both in Australia and internationally air travel, restaurant bookings and a range of other activities had fallen sharply.
They were the result of a “private shutdown” that commenced before the mandated government shutdown.
Even in a country such as Sweden, where a shutdown has not been mandatory, there has been a more than 75% reduction in movement in central Stockholm and a more than 90% reduction in travel to some domestic holiday destinations.
To be generous, let’s assume the costs attributable to the government-mandated part of the shutdown are half of the total costs, making their cost A$90 billion.
In reality, they are likely to be less, one important study suggests <a href="https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.04630.pdf" target="_blank">much less</a>.
It is hard to imagine a much bigger private shutdown not taking place had the government decided to simply let the disease rip until its spread was slowed by herd immunity.
<h2>Support is not a cost</h2>
It is also important to note that the government’s spending of A$214 billion to support the economy during the shutdown is a transfer of resources from one part of society to another rather than a cost.
It creates neither direct costs nor benefits for society as a whole, other than the economic distortions coming from raising the revenue to service the spending.
With long-term government bond rates near 1% (less than inflation), the total cost of distortions is likely to be tiny.
Of course, this discussion simplifies what are incredibly complex social, health and economic questions. There are clearly further costs, from both relaxing restrictions and keeping them in place.
<h2>Other costs are not that big</h2>
These costs are worthy of serious study and should rightly be part of a comprehensive public policy discussion. But looked at through the lens of a cost-benefit analysis these combined effects are likely to be small relative to the value of preventing mass death.
Among them are the incidence of mental health problems and domestic violence under lockdowns. They are important concerns that should be addressed by targeted and well-designed programs.
Weighing against that is evidence that economic crises are associated with <a href="https://voxeu.org/article/economic-crises-and-mortality" target="_blank">declines</a> in overall mortality rates. 
While suicides rise, total mortality, including deaths from heart attacks and workplace and traffic accidents, <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/04/02/coronavirus-economy-reopen-deaths-balance-analysis-159248" target="_blank">falls</a>.
In the specific case of this pandemic there is <a href="https://psyarxiv.com/3kfmh" target="_blank">survey evidence</a> based on respondents from 58 countries suggesting that strong government responses to the pandemic have been reducing worry and depression.
Also, we have to acknowledge that recessions and educational disruption have health and economic costs that are unequally spread.
The shutdown disproportionately impacts more-disadvantaged people including short-term casual workers, migrant workers, those with disabilities and the homeless.
<h2>The most-disadvantaged suffer, either way</h2>
This skewing will also be present in the herd immunity option. As New York City makes clear, a rapid spread of the disease also disproportionately impacts disadvantaged communities. One can only speculate about the disease burden should some of our remote indigenous communities get exposed.
To this we should add further achievements of the shutdown:
<ul>
<li>
elimination of mental trauma and grief from losing our loved ones
</li>
<li>
avoiding the costs of possible longer-term implications of the disease, which we still know little about
</li>
<li>
avoiding a collapse in the capacity of the health system to deal with other emergencies through the sheer numbers of COVID-19 infected combined with staff shortages due to illness
</li>
</ul>
Those advocating cost-benefit analysis of this kind have to apply the principle systematically. It is difficult to see how the total of these sorts of considerations on each side of the ledger could compare to the benefit of lives saved. They will be an order of magnitude, if not two, smaller.
<h2>$90 billion, versus $1.1 trillion</h2>
In the cold calculus of cost-benefit analysis, a highly pessimistic view of the economic costs of Australia’s shutdown comes to around $90 billion.
It is a small price to pay compared to the statistical value of lives the shutdown should save, around A$1.1 trillion.
It produces a simple message. The shutdown wins.
The question we now face is how quickly to relax restrictions. Here, too, there are costs and benefits, and we need to be mindful of the economic cost of a second-wave outbreak, plus mortality costs of disease spread before effective treatments or vaccine become available.
And in all of this bean counting, we should remember that putting a price tag on human life is sometimes unavoidable – such as when a doctor with access to only one ventilator has to choose between two patients.
But we shouldn’t mistake necessity for desirability. We should seek to avoid needing to make such wrenching choices whenever possible.
Dr Jen Schaefer of the Royal Children’s Hospital Melbourne assisted with the preparation of this piece.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/138303/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/richard-holden-118107" target="_blank">Richard Holden</a>, Professor of Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/unsw-1414" target="_blank">UNSW</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/bruce-preston-452859" target="_blank">Bruce Preston</a>, Professor of Economics, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-melbourne-722" target="_blank">University of Melbourne</a>
This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-costs-of-the-shutdown-are-overestimated-theyre-outweighed-by-its-1-trillion-benefit-138303" target="_blank">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Costs of the shutdown are overestimated, they’re outweighed by its $1 trillion benefit

<html><body>
EXPERT OBSERVER
With Melbourne returning to lockdown conditions amidst an acceleration in virus cases, it’s worthwhile looking back at the housing markets performance through the earlier lockdown period. From midnight of July 8th, residents of Melbourne and the Mitchell Shire will be unable to leave their home unless they are shopping for essential items, seeking/giving medical care, exercising or required to study/work away from home. The return to lock down measures comes as the COVID-19 curve accelerates, with the number of new daily cases reaching record highs over the past few days.
Although onsite auctions and open homes aren’t listed specifically as restricted activities on the DHS web site, considering the strict ‘stay at home’ rules, the implication is that the renewed lockdown measures include a ban on-site auctions and open home inspections.
Over the previous lockdown period, which was in place between late March and mid-May, housing market activity was significantly disrupted. The previous lockdown period saw real estate agent activity across Victoria slump by almost 70% before gradually improving post-Easter, with a sharp rise in activity once lockdown policies were eased around mid-May.
The drop in real estate agent activity foreshadowed a sharp drop in new listing numbers across Melbourne. Between mid-March and early-May the number of new listings added to the Melbourne housing market more than halved, to be 34% lower compared wit the same time a year ago.
As restrictions were eased and consumer sentiment recovered to more normal levels, new listing numbers increased and were tracking 18% higher than a year ago through the first week of July. With advertised stock levels falling and a plunge in consumer sentiment, the lockdown period also saw sales activity drop to the lowest level since the early 1990’s (excluding the seasonally slow January months).
CoreLogic’s estimate of home sales dropped by 8.1% in March before plunging by 38.1% in April. As restrictions eased and both sellers and buyers became more confident, the number of home sales has picked up over the past two months to be 59% higher than the April low.
Auction results provided a further signpost of the housing market’s performance through the lock-down period, with Melbourne clearance rates falling to just 20% in early April after consistently tracking around the mid-70% range prior to March 2020.
The drop in clearance rates was influenced by a substantial number of withdrawn auctions, while the large proportion of successful auctions (around 80%) were actually sold before the auction was held signaling a lack of vendor confidence to test the market under the hammer. Since restrictions were lifted, clearance rates have returned to the early 60% range, and the proportion of withdrawn auctions and ‘sold priors’ have normalised.
Melbourne also saw home values starting to trend lower from April, recording a 2.3% drop in dwelling values over the June quarter, which has been the largest decline to-date across the capital cities through the COVID period.
Looking forward, the six-week lockdown period will result in renewed downwards pressure on Victoria’s economy, including a worsening in labour market conditions, especially in those industries such as food and accommodation services and the arts and recreation services, that have proven to be extremely sensitive to strict social distancing measures.
Consumer sentiment readings, which are highly correlated with housing activity, have already been dragged lower due to the acceleration in Victoria’s virus curve, and will likely fall further as consumers react negatively to the economic and social implications of the lockdown along with increased uncertainty.
If the housing market’s performance through the previous lockdown is anything to go by, it’s highly likely that Melbourne property transaction activity will see a sharp drop over the next six weeks, with both a material decline in new listings as vendors lose confidence in testing the market, and a lower number of sales as buyers retreat to the sidelines.
Real estate agents are arguably more prepared to switch towards an online selling environment, however, as we have seen through the previous lockdown period, the negative impacts of weaker confidence and less ability to inspect a property is likely to result in less buying and selling activity. The impact on home values is harder to see.
The downturn in Melbourne home values has been mild to date, and dwelling values were continuing to fall after restrictions were lifted amidst rising market activity.
A return to a shortage of advertised supply should help to insulate home values from material declines, as will persistently low interest rates, ongoing government stimulus and forbearance measures for distressed borrowers which will help to keep urgent sales off the market.
Once the restrictions are lifted in six weeks-time there is likely to be a level of pent-up demand which will see housing activity improve, as it did when previously when social distancing measures were relaxed or lifted.
TIM LAWLESS is the research director for CoreLogic Asia Pacific
</body></html>

tlawless-5VLUrbAk9s

Impact of the second lockdown on Melbourne’s housing market: Tim Lawless

<html><body>
A large majority of Victorians approve of the way Premier Daniel Andrews is handling his job, according to a Roy Morgan Snap SMS survey on Victoria’s Stage 4 restrictions.
However, 76 per cent said the Victorian government should compensate small businesses not forced to close.
The current restrictions will continue until the end of September, with a longer roadmap keeping many businesses closed throughout October.
The survey asked respondents three questions from a pool of six to determine their attitudes towards the current government directives.
According to the results, only 38 per cent of Melbournians say the night-time curfew in Melbourne should end now, compared to only 31 per cent of country Victorians.
Over 80 per cent of respondents who identified with the ALP and Greens parties, supported Andrews’ handling, whilst only 43 per cent of L-NP approving of his leadership.
<img src="https://www.urban.com.au/images/Screen%20Shot%202020-09-10%20at%202.11.03%20pm.png" alt="">
L-NP supporters also favoured ending the restrictions, with 51 per cent saying Melbourne restaurants should be able to provide table services.
Only 26 per cent of ALP supporters agreed, preferring to keep restrictions as they are.
The survey was conducted on Tuesday, September 8, with a Victoria-wide cross-section of 2,325 Victorians.
</body></html>

Majority of Victorians approve of the Premier's handling of his job: Roy Morgan

<html><body>
Restaurant &amp; Catering Australia welcomed Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews’ announcement that regional Victoria will be able to move to step 3 of the roadmap.
From 11.59PM on Wednesday, September 16, hospitality businesses in regional Victoria were able to serve patrons outdoors, with a cap of 50 seated patrons per venue.
An updated ‘two square metre’ density limit will be put into place.
Under the new guidelines, venues can open with a cap of 10 seated customers per space – with up to two spaces per venue – and in line with the existing ‘four square metre’ density rule.
The announcement was welcome news for regional Victorian businesses, according to R&amp;CA CEO Wes Lambert.
“This is undoubtedly welcome news to the thousands of regional Victorian hospitality businesses who have been under strict lockdowns despite the fact that case numbers have been virtually at zero”, he said.
However, Lambert noted that more is needed to help businesses across Greater Melbourne, who will be subject to strict lockdowns until at least the end of November.
“R&amp;CA will continue to lobby the Andrews Government and the DHHS for indoor dining to be allowed under step 3 rather than outdoor only,” he said.
The industry association believes that allowing limited indoor dining earlier, as has been done for regional Victoria, will save thousands of businesses and jobs across Melbourne. 
R&amp;CA presents the interests of over 45,000 restaurants, cafes and catering businesses in Australia, with the aim of ensuring owners and operators within the hospitality industry remain profitable and sustainable. 
“While support for our sector is welcome, there is only one way to truly support our sector – and that is to get us open sooner”, Lambert said.  
</body></html>

The hospitality industry welcomes regional Victoria's reopening

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
The idea of moving to the country has <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-10/post-covid-19-pandemic-simpler-life-migration/12229082">gained momentum</a> through the COVID-19 pandemic. Many workplaces have introduced <a href="https://theconversation.com/with-management-resistance-overcome-working-from-home-may-be-here-to-stay-144850">new policies on working from home</a> that give employees the flexibility needed to make the switch.
Lockdowns have shown many just how cramped and uncomfortable life can be when you cannot escape to the usual activities that get you out of the house. And if everything is closed, what is the point of being in the city and paying a higher rent or mortgage anyway? The Reserve Bank has <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/publications/bulletin/2020/sep/the-rental-market-and-covid-19">noted rents have gone down</a> and vacancy rates have gone up in major cities.
At the same time, some real estate agents have <a href="https://www.propertyobserver.com.au/https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-15/australians-seek-regional-affordability-house-prices-coronavirus/12242252">noticed an upturn</a> in interest in renting or buying rural and regional properties. The <a href="https://www.domain.com.au/news/these-are-the-best-performing-property-markets-in-australia-domain-house-price-report-1000315/">demand in some regional areas</a> has pushed up prices by <a href="https://www.domain.com.au/news/where-regional-australian-house-prices-moved-the-most-domain-house-price-report-1000799/">as much as 30%</a> in the year to October. It seems many are already making the switch to country living.
It sounds idyllic. Escape the rat race, have space to grow veggies and let the kids play outside. You won’t have to commute any more, and you might even be able to buy a house in the country at a time when city prices remain out of reach for many. You could be living the dream.
Find a place that matches your values
So how do you know if this is right for you, or a disaster waiting to happen?
In <a href="https://eprints.usq.edu.au/34713/">my research</a> with people who moved to the country, I found successful moves came down to how closely aligned people’s values were with the attributes of the place they moved to. For example, some people value space and quiet more than bustle and activity. If they found these attributes in their new home, then they were able to craft a new life that was deeply satisfying.
When you look through the pages of a glossy magazine such as Country Style, you might find yourself yearning for the lifestyle it depicts – the grassy fields, the peaceful but quirky homes filled with flea-market finds, the home-grown abundance and the happy, contented people. These are long-held and highly regarded values that many hold dear.
The roots of these ideals are deep. Representations of the country as a rural idyll, a place to escape to, are centuries older than our <a href="https://theconversation.com/imagining-your-own-seachange-how-media-inspire-our-great-escapes-105207">current media</a>.
Epicurus (340BC to 270BC) moved from the centre of Athens to the countryside just outside so he could grow vegetables and live simply. Virgil’s (70BC to 19BC) Eclogues emphasised a rural idyll, as did much later painters such as John Constable and Eugene von Guérard. Henry David Thoreau’s Walden (1845) is an oft-quoted classic about an urban dweller moving to a rural place to live a better life (albeit temporarily in his case).
Early Australian writers such as A.B. “Banjo” Paterson and Henry Lawson took up this nostalgic ideal in the fledgling colony. So did artists such as Tom Roberts, Arthur Streeton and Charles Condor when they travelled to then-rural Heidelberg, now part of Melbourne, to paint the uniquely Australian countryside.
More recently, we have seen Peter Mayle’s <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Year_in_Provence">A Year in Provence</a> (1991) sketch a romantic picture of city dwellers moving to rural France. And there are popular television series such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Good_Life_(1975_TV_series)">The Good Life</a> (1975-77), <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaChange">Seachange</a> (1998-2000, 2019), <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_Cottage_Australia">River Cottage Australia</a> (2013-16) and most recently <a href="https://tvtonight.com.au/2020/10/escape-from-the-city-reaches-final-episode">Escape from the City</a>.
Beware the gap between depictions and reality
We know the media are a powerful factor in helping us develop and share our identity and personal narratives. We respond to television shows, books and magazines that we are interested in by becoming their audience. We might share values, goals, ideas or even similar stories with the media we watch. We then, consciously or unconsciously, learn from or adopt those ideas and values in a process of socialisation that shows us how we might live a better life.
Media are only a representation, however. A multitude of factors, not least of which are sales and advertising revenues, go into the process of decision-making as images and stories are crafted for the various outlets. There can be a tendency for media to adopt stereotypes as a shorthand form of communication, but these do not necessarily reflect the reality they purport to depict.
This might seem obvious, but it is all too easy to accept these images as truth when we are inclined towards that viewpoint anyway.
Do you value the things that make a rural place what it is, whether that is peacefulness, an absence of people, vistas of rolling hills, or the community of a small country town? If you do, there’s a good chance a move to the country will enable you to live more closely in line with your values and so be a successful one.
If, on the other hand, you value city-style living, which includes attractions, shops, events and being close to services, you might want to reassess whether a seachange or treechange is right for you.
<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/rachael-wallis-568028">Rachael Wallis</a>, Lecturer, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-southern-queensland-1069">University of Southern Queensland</a>
This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/it-seemed-like-a-good-idea-in-lockdown-but-is-moving-to-the-country-right-for-you-148807">original article</a>.
</body></html>

Lockdown

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Lockdown

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News