Unless you are 8 years old this is just not true.

    People have been crying "bubble" my entire life, and 
    I'm yet to see one actually "burst".

I gather you didn't work in tech in 2000?

This is a fine example of what I was saying, this is people cramming money into something with the hope of getting rich in a short period of time. People getting in knew it was a high risk gamble. Not to mention that the tech industry is now one of the biggest on the planet. Is it still a bubble?

Edit: attempt to add clarity.

The core of what I'm trying to say is almost any increasing asset is labelled as a bubble now days. I'm not denying that there aren't shady investments that appear and collapse all the time, some are enormous, like the tech bubble.

But it requires further classification. There are gambling bubbles built by thousands of agents where some have seen astronomical profit, but then there seems to be more stable "bubbles" like all of the bubbles mentioned in the article.

A bubble isn't a bubble, not without further clarification.

How was the property market crash in the US not a case of a bubble bursting? Some other obvious cases would be Ireland and Spain around the same time. How they were inflated and what triggered the collapses is irrelevant. The pattern is the same - speculation drives prices to unrealistic levels and eventually a major correction occurs.

Australia was pretty much unaffected by all that. And it seems OP mentioned that subprime bubble.

OP was implying that because the US property boom and bust involved deception ("scam driven") that it wasn't a real bubble - only close to a bubble.

OP never mentioned Aus - only that they had heard a lot of talk of bubbles but hadn't identified any. I was just giving a few recent examples that I'm sure most would agree qualify as such.

This whole thread is based on an article about Aus. I think it's reasonable to take people's comments in that context unless otherwise specified.