Over the summer months, I had a stack of people asking about the big drop in the sharemarket in the November to January period and even more about the fall in property values in many parts of Australia, but in particular Sydney and Melbourne.

These questions are not in the least bit strange, because shares and property are important assets for most of us.

But what is strange is that questions about a decline in share values are nearly always linked to "Should I sell?". But when it comes to property the questions revolve around "Is it time to buy?", with comments about "bargains" in the market.

What is it with property? We Australians have a really deep desire to own a home to live in.

That is very normal - home ownership brings a variety of emotional and security-related issues into play.

My wife and I have this deep in our DNA. You will have heard and read about my bias towards home ownership over my nearly 40 years of commenting on money.

We are certainly financially poorer for it but since we first had a mortgage in 1984 we have striven to pay it off. Children coming along and moves to houses with more bedrooms saw our mortgage fall and then jump.

We finally got rid of mortgage debt some 20 years after we first had one, in about 2004. I get the "lazy equity" argument, meaning we did not use our home to borrow against to invest.

This was a blessing in the inevitable big downturns but over the decades we were a net financial loser.

As you would expect, investment returns on decent assets greatly outperform the cost of debt in the long run. This was obvious to us in 1984 and it remains obvious today. We could borrow against our home at, say, 4%.

Do we think property and shares will do better than 4% over time? Of course we do.

The income yield alone on shares is more than this, and rental returns on property would pretty much cover it. Then there is the potential for capital growth.

But we made the choice to become debt free on our home, then lock away the title deeds for a really strong emotional reason. We sleep better at night.

Property has a mythical status for Australians and I don't mind that. Hence when prices fall, we still love it and so if it is cheaper it must be "even better".

It is really illogical, though, to not apply the same discipline to shares.

But the history of share ownership is very different from that of property. When I started working in the world of money back in about 1980, some 3% of us owned a share.

So while we have seen shares do very well, arguably better than property over the past four decades, we don't have a deep DNA-type attachment to them. Maybe this is why when they fall, a typical human response is a desire to sell.

A real plus for property is that when it does fall, it is really hard to sell. So we shrug and say "it will pick up".

With shares we have total liquidity and you can sell in a few minutes. We buy most as prices rise, and the most near market peaks. We sell as markets fall, and the most near market bottoms.

We have different experiences with shares.

For example, I've held Commonwealth Bank shares since the float. The price was $5.40.

Since then I have seen them at nearly $90, down to $24 in the GFC and now about $70. I am not silly, so I hold a diversified portfolio.

At any given time some of my shares are having a rough time, others a good time. What I love is the flow of dividends. My portfolio, which is just shares you know, sends us about 5% a year with no effort on my part. Lovely!

Now I think about it more deeply, maybe we are not strange at all. Property is just so familiar to us.

When it falls we think "it'll be right". As our population is growing so quickly, with a long-term perspective that view will be correct.

But so will it be for shares. More people, living longer, with higher levels of wealth than at any point in history will also drive demand for goods and services produced by companies.

So in a strong and growing economy, with a growing population, my answer is that the time to buy quality property or shares is whenever you can. But it is an even better time to buy in a falling market.

The only proviso here is that you have a long-term view and never overborrow.

The Money team, superbly led by Effie Zahos as editor and the iconic Paul Clitheroe as chief commentator, did something extraordinary when they started in 1999.

They delivered the very first practical and easy-to-understand information on money to the everyday household.

Money, in its 20th year, is moving to its new home with the Rainmaker Group, a financial services information company.

While Rainmaker is little known outside the financial services industry, it has covered money-related issues for more than 28 years. It publishes Financial Standard, an industry newspaper where I cut my teeth as a finance journalist, covering superannuation, financial advice and wealth management.

While Money is changing address, it is not changing its mission. It will stay close to its roots and strive to continue what it does best. Rainmaker has been a regular contributor and supporter of Money over the years.

Paul believes that consumer advocacy is first and foremost to Money's mission, and we agree. He isn't going anywhere; his columns and Q&A series will continue.

In the great symmetry of life, I celebrate my 20 years in finance media this year. As I reflect on this, I look back to my first job at national business magazine BRW.

At the time, as lead researcher on the Rich200 issue, the magazine's list of the 200 wealthiest individuals and families in Australia, little did I know that I was building the foundations to my present role.

I hope to impart the knowledge I've accumulated over the years, drawn from working alongside and interviewing many of the country's leading businesses, investors and wealth creators.

The future of Money is you.

The Money team - with new managing editor Darren Snyder - will keep a keen eye on your feedback, letters and requests. The pages of this magazine will remain as committed as ever to all things related to your financial wellbeing and success.

Don't worry: this wonderful magazine is not closing but merely going to a new home at Rainmaker.

While I've chosen not to follow Money's next phase I'll always have a special spot for this brand as Money was like the perfect child - one that never gave me backchat!

Regular readers would know that I only recently said goodbye to my eldest, so the timing is ironic. My daughter Nicky unexpectedly decided to move to Canberra to study at ANU.

"How will she cope?" I asked myself. "Will she be happy?" "Can she survive without me?"

At first I would call every day and night. Then every day and now it's every second day. The thing is she is doing absolutely fine. Happier and stronger than ever.

As she said to me: "There's no need to worry mum - you did a great job raising me."

I suspect it will be the same for me and Money magazine.

Money is in great shape - readership figures are up 15% year on year. It retains its place with both readers and the industry as one of the most respected finance magazines in Australia.

Our signature Best of the Best issue, now in its 19th year, continues to inspire readers to never be complacent with their financial products, and our campaigns to get Aussies saving more, spending less and engaging with their super will continue to hit the spot with old and new readers.

This July Money turns 20 and I wish her all the best.

To think that this magazine started off the back of a TV show - when the then very young Paul Clitheroe had the vision to start a magazine about money, at a time when nobody really talked about money in a fun, casual kind of way, was pure genius.

It was brought to life by the then editor, Pam Walkley, and myself. A little later our now deputy editor, Maria Bekiaris, joined the editorial team. Her tireless work has not gone unnoticed.

A big thank you to the entire Money team and all our contributors who will continue to inspire Aussies to make the most of their money. I would like to thank Susan Hely for bringing to life some great cover concepts.

Also our art director and designers Ann Loveday and Andrew McLagan, who created beautiful pages over the years; our sub-editors, Bob Christensen and Debbie Duncan, who checked and polished our copy; and our digital content producer, Sharyn McCowen, for engaging new readers online.

Most importantly, I thank you, the reader, from the bottom of my heart for continuing to pick up this magazine, for keeping it alive in these times of digital upheaval, and for believing in the power of financial literacy.

After 22 years on this wonderful brand it's now time for me to say goodbye.

Here's to your financial wealth and may you continue to enjoy your journey with Money.

Today there are more than 3 million people, including 739,000 children, living in poverty in Australia. This is one in eight adults and nearly one in five children. In a wealthy country such as our own, this is an unacceptable situation.

The majority of people living in poverty receive a social security payment, such as Newstart, Youth Allowance or a family payment.

Our social security payments are so low that they trap people in poverty - it's incredibly difficult to get a job when you're worrying about how to put food on the table or to make sure you have a roof over your head.

The rate of Newstart has not increased in real terms in 24 years, while the cost of the basics of life have gone up.

The stories of people struggling to get by on Newstart are harrowing.

Ellen, who is in her 60s and cares for two children, shared her story. "I eat one meal a day so the kids can eat. My sweet girl says I should eat more. I was a nurse for 27 years. All my savings have gone. I'm in so much debt. I try my best but feel so ashamed."

The single most immediate policy that would reduce poverty in Australia overnight is to lift the rate of Newstart and Youth Allowance by a minimum of $75 a week.

There is broad support for doing so, including from the Business Council of Australia and the Australian Council of Trade Unions, leading economists and former prime minister John Howard.

Many of us are just a job loss or a relationship breakdown away from relying on our safety net and almost 70% of the Australian community believes Newstart should be increased.

We can afford a decent social security safety net in Australia, including by ensuring that wealth and profits are taxed fairly.

Politicians must heed the calls from right across the community on the need for a decent social security safety net.

Ever since financial deregulation in the 1980s we've had a finance industry scandal followed by an inquiry, a quick fix and a declaration that it shouldn't happen again.

In the early 1990s there were royal commissions into the $1.7 billion Tri-continental/ State Bank Victoria collapse, the $3.1 billion State Bank of South Australia collapse and the WA Inc collapse which explored the interrelated activities at Rothwells bank, the $1.8 billion collapse of Bond Corporation and the $1.2 billion siphoned from Bell Resources.

A decade later in 2003, Justice Owen reported on the $5.3 billion collapse of Australia's largest insurer, HIH.

And now, bang on schedule, we have Kenneth Hayne delivering the final report of a royal commission into systemic misconduct in the banking, superannuation and financial services industry to a government that voted 26 times against holding it.

There are two particularly striking things about the 10-15 year cycle.

One is the rhythm of public inquiries followed by reports, then (sometimes) trials, then books, then almost everyone forgetting (except for those personally scarred), only for problems to resurface later.

The other is that the times between have been punctuated by government-commissioned banking and financial system reviews: the 1991 Campbell inquiry, the 1996 Wallis inquiry, the 2010 Cooper superannuation review and the 2012 Murray review . Each either missed or downplayed the links between poor governance, industry structure, systemic misconduct and prudential risk.

Has Hayne got the frequency right this time?

Commissioner Hayne's 1000-page final report hasn't gone far enough to end this cycle.

While his referral of 24 misdeeds for possible criminal and civil prosecution will help in righting past wrongs and perhaps focus the minds of directors and executives, the impact will be generational rather than permanent.

The flurry of prosecutions and actions will again reveal problems with the law - gaps in coverage, inadequate penalties and cases the law won't allow to stand up.

Taken together the recommendations are a patchwork of measures that if implemented will over time be eaten away - and at some point will be dismantled - because the rationale for their adoption will be forgotten.

Even before they are implemented they will have to run the gauntlet of a massive subterranean lobbying effort from industry to water them down, something Hayne indicated he expected.

The deepest flaw lies unaddressed

Even though Hayne emphasises the link between systemic misconduct, governance, structure and prudential (system-wide) risk, something that Treasury, the Reserve Bank and Australia's three business regulator amigos, APRA, ASIC and the ACCC, have long rejected, he makes no concrete suggestions to tackle it.

As we have written previously, research tells us big, systemically important, shareholder-focused, universal for-profit banks that cross-sell products are more profitable than smaller banks in the good times but are more prone to misconduct and to failure in the worse times.

Australia's big four fit the bill - they're big, they have been vertically integrated one-stop shops, they are very, very profitable and they are very focused on shareholder returns.

While the banks, apart from Westpac, have divested themselves of wealth management and insurance arms for now, there is nothing stopping them re-acquiring them in the future.

This means we are once again 10 or 15 years away from systemic misconduct resurfacing as big banks seek to become more profitable.

Putting the onus on directors won't much help

While heads might roll in yet another round of internal investigations to fix bank culture, it is wise to remember that, as journalist Adele Ferguson observed, ANZ's internal investigation of the Opes Prime collapse left the bigger governance lessons "unlearned".

Directors and senior executives of failed companies continue to live charmed lives.

The directors of Babcock and Brown were cheered as they left the building, while friends and family of the disgraced One.Tel director Jodee Rich have resurfaced at Hayne and other public inquiries.

Some of the One.Tel directors have had long corporate careers. The former chair at of the collapsed Allco Finance Group, Bob Mansfield, went on to review the ABC.

As commentator Adam Schwab bluntly put it, "corporate Australia is nothing if not forgiving".

It'll chase horses rather than close doors

Hayne is persisting with a chasing "bolting horses" approach to misconduct that relies on detection and enforcement.

We have argued this approach is just not as a effective as other alternatives such as two-tier boards and employee directors which have a better track record of keeping stable doors closed and horses tethered.

Without them we could very easily have another crisis and another royal commission in 15 to 15 years.

On the other hand, Ireland has been prepared to change corporate structures. After the meltdown of its financial system triggered by the end of a "classic vanilla property boom", its parliament legislated to appoint public interest directors to the boards of its failed banks.

These changes were designed to ensure bank directors put the public interest first, ahead of shareholders' interests and even customers' interests.

It's beyond time we did it here.

Hayne's main recommendations:

• Mortgage brokers required to act in the best interests of the borrower.
• Mortgage brokers to charge borrowers rather than lenders.
• Insurance providers required to "take reasonable care".
• Funeral insurance to be subject to financial service laws.
• Cap on insurance sales commissions for car dealers.
• Reduced cap on life insurance commissions.
• Cold call selling of financial products banned.
• Ongoing fee arrangements to be reapproved annually.
• "Grandfathering" of fee arrangements to stop.
• Banks to no longer charge dishonour fees on basic accounts.
• Banks to no longer provide overdrafts on basic accounts without consent.
• National scheme for mediation of farm debt.
• Industry-funded compensation scheme of last resort.
• Super fund trustees not to be employees of super fund owner.
• Australians to be defaulted into only one super fund, once.
• ASIC to use court action as the "starting point" for considering how to take action.
• External body to oversee APRA and ASIC.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.