Australian Politics Forum

Australian Politics Forum
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl General Discussion >> Federal Politics >> If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing. http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1687236707 Message started by Sir lastnail on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm

Title: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm

And they keep telling us that removing negative won't increase supply then a simple solution is to limit negative gearing to brand new house and land packages instead of recycling the same old dumps that were built 50 years ago. This will encourage the property hoarders to invest in new houses which will increase supply. Problem solved, otherwise it is just a tax avoidance scheme for the non productive side of the economy who won't invest in anything else :(

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1maTkeUSMM&t=1631s

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bobby. on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 3:08pm

Hi sir Nail,
the politicians created a perfect storm with their negative gearing
that caused massive rises in prices of property and poor investment in anything else.
Only 5.5% of our economy is manufacturing.
Australia was turned into a get rich quick Ponzi scheme for property
and not a place that created real jobs.

https://www.aspistrategist.org.au/government-fund-wont-stop-australian-manufacturings-structural-decline/
Manufacturing has been falling as a share of the economy for a lot longer than that,
having peaked at more than 25% in the 1970s compared to just 5.5% now. (6 Oct 2020)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 3:16pm

Bobby. wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 3:08pm:

and this is exactly what they wanted for their non productive investments :(

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bobby. on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 3:25pm

We have incompetent politicians.

Only 5.5% of our economy is manufacturing.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Dnarever on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:38pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

What if they work out that the best way to profit on new houses is to knock down old houses ?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:42pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Dear God ... you don’t know much about negative gearing Last Nail 😩

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:54pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:42pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Dear God ... you don’t know much about negative gearing Last Nail 😩

what don't i know about it Lisa ?

A clown borrows a truck load of money to buy a 50 yo dump and then writes the interest payments off against the income from their day job. How does that add to the supply of housing ?? It doesn't unless it's a new house and land package otherwise just investing in the same dump adds nothing to the supply !!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 9:18pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:54pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:42pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Dear God ... you don’t know much about negative gearing Last Nail 😩

For starters : Negative gearing isn’t a long term strategy for any property.

Also in borrowing money to invest in Australian real estate...you are supplying rental opportunities to fellow Australians WHILST keeping Australian real estate in Australian hands.

Do you understand how important that is? It’s keeping the money in the family so to speak ie in Australia.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 10:06pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:54pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:42pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Dear God ... you don’t know much about negative gearing Last Nail 😩

For once I agree with you.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 10:13pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 9:18pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:54pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:42pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Dear God ... you don’t know much about negative gearing Last Nail 😩

for every investment property sold to an owner occupier is one less renter so it's a zero sum game. By investing in existing property you are not adding to the supply of property at all :(

As for foreign investors by all means limit them to investing in new house and land packages for the same reason ;)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 10:28pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 10:13pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 9:18pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:54pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:42pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Dear God ... you don’t know much about negative gearing Last Nail 😩

1. For every investment property sold to an owner. occupier is one less renter so it's a zero sum game. By investing in existing property you are not adding to the supply of property at all :(

2. As for foreign investors by all means limit them to investing in new house and land packages for the same reason ;)

1. Ok so let’s look at that. I’ve got a rental property atm which I wouldn’t mind selling. It’s worth $2.5 million in today’s market. It’s renting at $1000 a week.

Tell me how selling this property will guarantee it going to an owner occupier? Also tell me how selling this property will definitely go to a non Asian/foreign INVESTOR for starters? Also explain to me how a current renter is going to afford this home so they can become an owner buyer? I can assure you here and now that the only possible buyer for my house will be an Asian that’s cashed up compliments of CCP.

Also ....do you seriously think you will be able to ensure that resident or foreign investors will obey/comply with what YOU think they should do with THEIR OWN money?

Also what about existing resident or foreign investors? Are you saying they should be forced to sell their investment properties which are providing shelter to those Australians who can’t afford to buy? Who will buy their homes? And where should these existing resident investors of real estate do with the money they get IF they sell?

Last Nail....when a house is on the market ... do you know what that means? It means it’s up for sale to the highest bidder (either via negotiation or by auction).

And right now...it’s the Asians that are buying up blue chip real estate that’s worth buying up because these properties double every 5 - 10 years.

The rest ie new cardboard homes in new housing estates is just junk. And THAT isn’t worth investing in. You can’t make money there. Those struggling to buy their 1st home might have a chance to stop renting by buying that cheap and quick junk. That’s about it. It keeps state stamp duty coffers rolling and local councils love it because it means more rates. It keeps real estate agents in jobs and it means banks can continue to lend lots of money to idiots who will be forced to pay whatever they’ve borrowed back at 6% while their cardboard homes will barely increase in value over the next 10 years.

One last comment : we’ve been having these discussions for many years Last Nail. Even way back on Yahoo I believe. Yes?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 9:23am

Why don’t you tell us, FD?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 10:23am

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

Freediver

Just a bit of background info: Last Nail is a friend from Yahoo who has maintained a long held belief that people should invest their money in shares only...NOT real estate.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:02pm

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

because the pollies are being paid to much and are paying too much tax ;)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:08pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 10:23am:

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

Freediver

Just a bit of background info: Last Nail is a friend from Yahoo who has maintained a long held belief that people should invest their money in shares only...NOT real estate.

Correction, people should be encouraged to invest in productive assets over non productive assets such as property. Just like this dude says ;)

https://www.afr.com/wealth/people/the-billionaire-slamming-australia-s-obsession-with-property-20220713-p5b1af

Quote:

The billionaire who is happy to pay more tax than he should

“We aren’t really good at the creative businesses, but Australia has a lot of creative ideas,” Mr Petty tells How I Made It.

“There’s a lot of people who actually have good ideas and a lot of people that want manufacturing. I think what is depressing is the business people here are in some ways letting it down.”

He takes aim at “insane” accounting standards, which favour property and mining enterprises.

“They can’t literally value IP,” he says.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:13pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 10:28pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 10:13pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 9:18pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:54pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:42pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Dear God ... you don’t know much about negative gearing Last Nail 😩

That's fine Lisa. Lets just prioritize owner occupiers over greedy property hoarders by abolishing negative gearing on existing dumps and therefore saving 20 billion a year in a tax minimization racket ;)

Yes this is an old story and that greedy poli/doctor on Q&A wants her cake and eat it too as usual so now I am offering her a solution to the supply issue which she has no excuse not to accept :(

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:15pm

Which brings us back to this 👇

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 9:18pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:54pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:42pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Dear God ... you don’t know much about negative gearing Last Nail 😩

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:17pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:08pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 10:23am:

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

Freediver

Just a bit of background info: Last Nail is a friend from Yahoo who has maintained a long held belief that people should invest their money in shares only...NOT real estate.

Australians housing Australians isn’t being productive in your opinion?? Okkkkay.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:21pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:15pm:

Which brings us back to this 👇

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 9:18pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:54pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 8:42pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Dear God ... you don’t know much about negative gearing Last Nail 😩

Number 1 is people who buy investment properties are not buying it to do any renter any favours. The only reason why you rent them out is to make even more money on your investment and how does that help someone who just wants to own one property to live in, if you are hoarding 8 of them ? It doesn't. Not only that when you decide to flip one of your investments dumps to make some easy bucks you indiscriminately throw the tenants out on the street like you are doing them some sort of a favour. Total rubbish ! 80% of those polled on that Q&A episode wanted NG abolished for good reason ;)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:23pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:17pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:08pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 10:23am:

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

Freediver

Just a bit of background info: Last Nail is a friend from Yahoo who has maintained a long held belief that people should invest their money in shares only...NOT real estate.

Australians housing Australians isn’t being productive in your opinion?? Okkkkay.

So we can all stay at home because our houses will be productive and create a source of wealth for the copuntrv ??

Ever seen how productive Detroit Michigan is with all of those houses sitting vacant and being so productive ?? :D LOL

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:34pm

People who choose to invest in property do so to invest and to make money. That’s exactly what you do Nails when you choose to invest in stocks and shares. Yes?

You do realise that your argument is essentially based on YOU dictating where/how people ought to be investing their own money...yes? That just there is very North Koreanesque don’t you think Last Nail?

In Australia people are allowed to invest their money any way they like. It’s part n parcel of freedom and free will. You yourself availed yourself of the freedom and free will to invest in stocks and shares (which IMO is a high risk venture and as such is a no no).

Another little thing .... your idea of who invests in real estate is about 30 yrs out of date.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:43pm

Quote:

So we can all stay at home because our houses will be productive and create a source of wealth for the country??

Ahhh so that’s how you see Australians who invest in Australian real estate. Well there’s your problem. You’re carrying around an ill informed and misinformed perception which totally disregards the reality of real estate investing in Australia by Australians TODAY. You’re living in the past Last Nail.

We started this argument around 20 years ago. My 2 older kids have grown up in that time and they’re now landlords. Please tell me you’re not still renting AND carrying on (and on and on) ... about Warren Buffet
🥺😳😐😩

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by The Grappler on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 1:33pm

Clearly investment housing hasn't done the claimed job of creating plenty of living spaces...... only managed to overly fatten without effort some and wreck the economy in doing so....

Cultural Revolution and Red Guards anyone? Some of these rich investors need to be 'struggled' in order to make them see reason and sign their property portfolios over to The People...... (heh, heh) ... let's start with the property millionaire politicians.....

Now then about that immigration policy or total lack thereof......... that's not a policy's arsehole, that Black Australia Policy Renewed ....

While we're here - hands up all those prepared to pay the rent and reparations out of their own bank account?

If you're not - then STFU or be 'struggled' yourself. Time is coming when the People will have had enough.... slow to move, but once moving unstoppable. 8-)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 4:04pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:34pm:

No not at all. Just don't expect every other tax payer who doesn't own an investment property to underwrite your NG tax concessions which cost 20 billion a year.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 4:07pm

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 1:33pm:

that's because all they are doing is recycling the same old dumps again and again and again and inflating their price whilst not adding anything to the supply of housing and costing 20 billion a year in lost tax revenue. :(

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 4:14pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:43pm:

Quote:

So we can all stay at home because our houses will be productive and create a source of wealth for the country??

Yes the past when we used to actually manufacture things and be productive. Now the whole country is dominated by 4 crooked banks who produce absolutely nothing except more debt and inflate house prices in a ponzi scheme which has been aided and abetted by successive governments who know nothing else :(

Like I said why don't you invest in brand new house and land packages in whoop whoop ?? What's wrong with that ? No you are just greedy :(

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 4:41pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 4:07pm:

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 1:33pm:

Are you referring to someone you personally know who does this?

Not all real estate investors are like that.

You invest your money to make more money. Correct? If that strategy involves knocking down an old dump and constructing a brand new duplex building (which is something many real estate investors do in quite a number of Sydney’s suburbs) then you are providing extra housing. Yes?

The thing you don’t realise is that many councils here in Sydney have designated areas within suburbs which are zoned low level density or R1. That means you are not allowed to build a duplex even. If a real estate investor was to buy an old dump on a typical site of around 500m2 for around 1.8 to 2 million and then demolish and replace said old dump with a brand new duplex then each duplex would then sell for $2.2 million in the current market (which is pretty bad for those trying to build and/or sell).

Bottom line? Extra housing for Sydney plus real estate investor makes money too. Win win? Umm no! Not really. Let me explain why.

You can’t expect a real estate investor to go through the risks involved and not make a profit. And that’s what you don’t get Last Nail...investing involves RISK. In the high risk building industry where people die or are injured and structures can prove unworthy if shortcuts are taken ... there’s a hell of a lot of risk riding on every build.

Your little share portfolio does not come anywhere near these sorts of risk factors. The biggest risk you could personally face may well be a loss or bankruptcy. Real estate investors who supply extra housing through demolishing and developing suffer far more than just that. Would you like me to detail their risks a little bit more for you? Let me know.

Now .... do you think you could stop dictating how/what others ought to do with THEIR money? It’s not your call. Also do you think you could stop pushing people into corners they don’t feel confident or comfortable in?

Let me illustrate by way of example : Right now you’re essentially pushing someone like me into a corner to demolish/develop/supply extra housing for others. I don’t want to. I don’t have to. Why? Right now as I type ...given the global recession and high inflation and high interest rates etc the costs, the risks of going bankrupt, the risk to my health, the risk to my marriage breaking down...could well destroy me. It may please you though. But it has destroyed lives. I can start naming people who have divorced and/or committed suicide. The pressures involved have even caused heart attacks (which have absolutely nothing to do with Covid19). And it’s not all just financial pressure as there’s an expectation to be on call all the time to sort out issues such as health and safety risks and supply chain shortages. Next level stress 👉 next level fatigue 👉 full physical/emotional collapse.

The process is now twice as costly as you initially think esp after all the necessary insurances and construction loan interest rates come into play. Plus there’s no guarantee that you’ll be able to sell your duplexes....and that’s where people try and sell off the plan in order to secure funds to keep the banks off their case.

Last Nail .... have you ever built anything? I don’t think you have because I’m essentially explaining the bloody obvious to you 😔😩☹️

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 5:00pm

Quote:

Like I said why don't you invest in brand new house and land packages in whoop whoop ?

I already answered that. Last night in fact.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 5:46pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 4:41pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 4:07pm:

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 1:33pm:

There are no benefits to the rest of us through negative gearing the same old dumps which is why it should be removed. You only want to keep it because of ulterior motives none of which benefits anyone else.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bobby. on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:28pm

There is no investment into Australia -
we're only interested in property Ponzi schemes.

Even overseas companies don't invest here:

https://www.timesofisrael.com/intel-to-invest-unprecedented-25-billion-in-chip-manufacturing-plant-in-israel/

Intel to invest ‘unprecedented’ $25 billion in chip manufacturing plant in Israel

Netanyahu hails investment as largest ever by a global private company in the country;
Kiryat Gat plant to hire thousands

By Sharon Wrobel 18 June 2023, 4:36 pm

US semiconductor giant Intel Corp. has inked an agreement in principle with the Israeli government to build a chip manufacturing plant in Kiryat Gat at an investment of $25 billion.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the Intel investment was “unprecedented” in Israel and would go toward building a chip manufacturing plant that will use the most advanced technology in the world. In 2019, Intel already held talks for an investment of around $10 billion into building the Kiryat Gat chip plant.

“This is the largest investment ever in the State of Israel,” Netanyahu said at the weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday. “This is an expression of great confidence in the Israeli economy and exactly reflects the strength of the free economy that we have built here, and the technological economy that we are developing here.”

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:53pm

They never invest here do they. We just get the fish that john west reject :(

Just lots of sh.t telemarketer jobs :(

Hey Lisa this is what Australia is all about. Property hoarders and gofers mining for dirt. Zero value add. Aussies are lazy bastards :(

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bobby. on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:04pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:53pm:

Hi sir Nail,
we don't process enough of what we mine -
we sell Yellowcake but not Uranium fuel rods or pellets -

we sell Lithium but not batteries -

we sell silicon but not solar panels etc etc

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:08pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:08pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 10:23am:

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

Freediver

Just a bit of background info: Last Nail is a friend from Yahoo who has maintained a long held belief that people should invest their money in shares only...NOT real estate.

This billionaire guy ??? 👇

https://www.afr.com/property/residential/rich-lister-buys-home-for-9-9m-in-frantic-zoom-auction-20210606-p57yhe

Oh he’s investing in real estate Last Nail. Blue chip real estate. Have you another example?

B778393B-9425-4740-A0D3-05252704BD84.jpeg (132 KB | 13 )

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:16pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:08pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:08pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 10:23am:

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

Freediver

Just a bit of background info: Last Nail is a friend from Yahoo who has maintained a long held belief that people should invest their money in shares only...NOT real estate.

And where did he get the money for that Lisa ? If he did what you prescribed to we'd all still be living in caves rubbing sticks together with zero progress.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:19pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:16pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:08pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:08pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 10:23am:

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

Freediver

Just a bit of background info: Last Nail is a friend from Yahoo who has maintained a long held belief that people should invest their money in shares only...NOT real estate.

And where did he get the money for that Lisa ? If he did what you prescribed to we'd all still be living in caves rubbing sticks together with zero progress.

Oh so investing $10 million in real estate is ok after all.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:20pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:19pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:16pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:08pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:08pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 10:23am:

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

Freediver

Just a bit of background info: Last Nail is a friend from Yahoo who has maintained a long held belief that people should invest their money in shares only...NOT real estate.

And where did he get the money for that Lisa ? If he did what you prescribed to we'd all still be living in caves rubbing sticks together with zero progress.

Oh so investing $10 million in real estate is ok after all.

Where did he get the money from Lisa ?? Flipping properties ?? :D LOL

Also read the original article. He likes paying his fair share of tax whereas you property hoarders like avoiding it :(

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:29pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:20pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:19pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:16pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:08pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:08pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 10:23am:

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

Freediver

Just a bit of background info: Last Nail is a friend from Yahoo who has maintained a long held belief that people should invest their money in shares only...NOT real estate.

And where did he get the money for that Lisa ? If he did what you prescribed to we'd all still be living in caves rubbing sticks together with zero progress.

Oh so investing $10 million in real estate is ok after all.

Where did he get the money from Lisa ?? Flipping properties ?? :D LOL

Yep. Just as I thought. By flipping properties.

Here ... read it and weep. 👇

He paid just $2.7m for it in 2012 and has more than doubled his money in less than 10 years.

Greg Hocking Jellis Craig real estate agency director Simon Gowling said it was the second time Mr Petty had been involved in a home selling $1m above expectations recently, after the film tech whiz drove the $9.9m price for his next home at 44 Merton St, Albert Park, in a high-priced online auction in June.

https://www.realestate.com.au/news/blackmagic-design-movie-magic-boss-grant-petty-sells-albert-park-home-1mplus-more-than-reserve/

So anyway Last Nail.....how much is your weekly rent tab these days?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:44pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:29pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:20pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:19pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:16pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:08pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:08pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 10:23am:

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

Freediver

Just a bit of background info: Last Nail is a friend from Yahoo who has maintained a long held belief that people should invest their money in shares only...NOT real estate.

And where did he get the money for that Lisa ? If he did what you prescribed to we'd all still be living in caves rubbing sticks together with zero progress.

Oh so investing $10 million in real estate is ok after all.

Where did he get the money from Lisa ?? Flipping properties ?? :D LOL

He made all of his money from hard work Lisa. Not just sponging off tax payers recycling old dumps.

See for yourself and read that original article I posted.

https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/au

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:46pm

Make no mistake - he made his money from various real estate ventures.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:53pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 7:46pm:

Make no mistake - he made his money from various real estate ventures.

If that was true why would he invest in something much more risky such as high tech ? Read the article properly !! He made his money from high tech value add and not from recycling borer infested old dumps using tax payers money !!

https://www.afr.com/wealth/people/the-billionaire-slamming-australia-s-obsession-with-property-20220713-p5b1af

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 8:06pm

Last Nail

We need to leave it there. One of my husband’s colleagues has committed suicide.

More details to come.

Police are now in attendance. No one is allowed to touch her. Yes she is still hanging apparently.

My husband is on his way to find out wtf happened. Said colleague appeared quite ok. It’s quite bizarre. All very unexpected and so I’m very sorry. Cheers.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 8:15pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 8:06pm:

Sure Lisa.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by crocodile on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 11:13pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 4:07pm:

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 1:33pm:

Nails, you really and truly are a fukkwit. If there were no tax concessions on property investments then it would simply add to the deductible costs when the property is sold thereby reducing profit and in turn reducing CGT obligations. It's even funnier because CGT is only levied on 50% of the profit. It makes no fukkin difference you idiot.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 11:31pm

If there were no concessions in property investing....rents would be even higher.

And THAT is essentially WHY negative gearing will stay put.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 7:26am

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:02pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

because the pollies are being paid to much and are paying too much tax ;)

That is not why.

How many economists do you know of who oppose negative gearing?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by JC Denton on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 7:37am

who gives a sh_t about negative gearing

its a minor contributor to land costs, much bigger contributors are too much immigration driven pop growth relative to the amount of supply and other things

that being said imagine trying to appeal to economists as a source on anything

hack quasi soft science bullsh_t that mostly seems to be a post facto justification for elites

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 7:38am

Quote:

Senior economists have suggested the Federal Government should scrap negative gearing, a move that would save $5 billion in the first year. Negative gearing allows property investors to claim expenses for a rental property including interest payments, repairs and council rates to reduce tax paid on any other income.
Economists say Government should scrap negative gearing tax br…

www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-06/economists-say-government-should-scrap-negative-gearing/5872700

Quote:

Inheritance taxes and negative gearing: how …
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/mar/30/australia-top...

A quarter of those surveyed backed winding back the ability to negatively gear (write off against tax) expenses incurred in owning investment properties, a concession costed by the tax expenditures statement at $24.4bn a year. Blundell-Wignall said negative gearing should have been wound back years ago: few … See more

DO economists back keeping negative gearing?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 7:59am

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 7:38am:

Quote:

www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-06/economists-say-government-should-scrap-negative-gearing/5872700

[quote]Inheritance taxes and negative gearing: how …
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/mar/30/australia-top...

A quarter of those surveyed backed winding back the ability to negatively gear (write off against tax) expenses incurred in owning investment properties, a concession costed by the tax expenditures statement at $24.4bn a year. Blundell-Wignall said negative gearing should have been wound back years ago: few … See more

DO economists back keeping negative gearing?[/quote]

From your first article:

Quote:

The Housing Industry Association's chief economist Harley Dale disagreed.

"One of the principal arguments made by opponents of negative gearing is that it would supposedly magically unlock all this housing stock as it's offloaded and becomes available for first homebuyers," Mr Dale said.

"I don't think the world works in that simple naive manner."

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 8:38am

He does not say NG should be retained tho, just says the results, in terms of existing homes made available to home buyers won’t be immediately obvious.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 8:45am

freediver wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 7:59am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 7:38am:

Quote:

DO economists back keeping negative gearing?

From your first article:

Quote:

[/quote]

Freediver

Did you notice that Monk is desperately relying on ONE article that’s TEN years old AND riddled with disagreements by other economists AND has never been actioned by ANY government in office since?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 8:59am

Nothing desperate about it, larry dear.

I did a search on “economists on negative gearing” and posted the first two. Enough to cast doubt on FD’s silly statement about economists wanting NG retained.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 9:10am

Drunk :

1. You googled.

2. You found something that’s almost 10 years old.

3. You are still to realise that it’s an opinion by an economist who hasn’t offered his name AND whose opinion has never gained traction by any party in Federal office.

4. You’re sitting there not realising how desperate and clueless you are.

Ok I have to ask ... how much alcohol have you drunk (to keep warm) this morning?

Meantime I think the rest of us will have to move on and do what we usually do ie leave you behind to continue fantasising about your boyfriend Larry.

Edit 1 : FYI Drunk .... it’s 2023.

Edit 2 : OMG .... you are reading/relying on something which a Bank of America economist stated back in 2014 ffs AND who was immediately debunked by Australian economists!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 9:11am

Yes, I googled, I bloody said so!

So what?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 9:17am

freediver wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 7:26am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 12:02pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 21^st, 2023 at 6:45am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 20^th, 2023 at 2:51pm:

Perhaps you should seek to understand why "they" want to keep negative gearing before offering economic advice.

because the pollies are being paid to much and are paying too much tax ;)

That is not why.

How many economists do you know of who oppose negative gearing?

Saul Eslake, Steve Keen, Grattan Institute...

And the payoff to the general public is lots of rental dumps they can never own :(

But it's a supply issue :D LOL

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by The Grappler on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 9:19am

Well - it's a pretty simple equation.... if it 'saves' money somewhere, then clearly that money must be going somewhere before the savings are put in place..... therefore it is a handout to those who least need it.

Bleed me a river about the 'mums and pops' investors who manage to sneak in under the corporates ...... there is not one argument left on this Earth to support both negative gearing for business and concessional tax on sale. Business must pay its way.

I slugged Chim Jalmers yesterday about his empty-headed comment that somehow 'baby boomers' were the root of all evil.... well, Jim - we are more than happy to remove your fancy salary and perks and super and make of you just another struggling baby boomer in retirement..... no problem, son. Twenty years in the gulag should struggle your thinking into the correct channels.... your kind of non-thinking must be isolated from the general community lest you infect weak minds....

This country desperately needs a new form of government - one where they cop $100k pa and costs on approved application, and such... and no amazing super fund funded by treasury at an exorbitant rate.

Let's see how many want the job then ................ you never met a poor retired politician...... azs someone said - we shouldn't be looking at the rich people who go into politics, but at the poor people who do that and come out rich. And all politicians and family must be strictly banned from participating in any 'ventures' funded by government...... how many have bought up packets of shares in the submarines repairs etc facilities already? 8-) 8-) 8-)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 9:19am

JC Denton wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 7:37am:

20 billions worth of tax concessions every year to benefit property hoarders is not minor !!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 9:26am

A bit over $24Bn yearly now, Lost Nail.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by The Grappler on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 9:37am

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 9:19am:

JC Denton wrote on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 7:37am:

20 billions worth of tax concessions every year to benefit property hoarders is not minor !!

Don't forget all the other issues I raised last night - not least the banks and their willingness to lend on a 'business plan' that is guaranteed by someone being forced to pay exorbitant rent, while making it hard for families to own their own home. Of course the banks and the government, many of the members own investment properties - want this bubble to continue and this imbalance to persist and perpetuate itself.... they can guarantee ever-increasing profits - and then they don't even want to pay tax on them when they sell them off.

Whenever I hear the trite phrase 'tax reform', that's my first port of call... that and business tax rules not shared by individuals (being based on the late 18th century when only the rich had a vote etc and the wherewithal to invest and thus made the rules - long overdue for change)..

You get where this country is off the rails? What did Hawkie do to us when he de-regulated the banks and loosed them upon the sleeping land...

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 22^nd, 2023 at 9:06pm

Monk, Nail et al, do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:32am

FD—do you think it right that people who provide not a single new dwelling should get a huge tax cut?

Are cats critters, FD?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:37am

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:32am:

FD—do you think it right that people who provide not a single new dwelling should get a huge tax cut?

Are cats critters, FD?

What do you mean by a "tax cut" Monk? Are you proposing a new tax on everyone who isn't a builder?

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:07am

Builder? People who negative gear buy an existing dwelling! Why should they get a tax cut for that? Do they actually buy an existing swelling for the sake of the tax cut NG gives? Then the second tax cut when they sell the existing dwelling and pay a very reduced capital gains tax!

Are cats critters, FD? You seem reluctant to answer for some reason.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:13am

Quote:

Why should they get a tax cut for that?

It's not a tax cut Monk. They are taxed on the same principle as any business owner, investor or employee. The reason for this will be obvious if you can give a straight answer to this simple question:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:16am

Nobody is forcing them to buy an existing property and I see no reason they should get TWO tax cuts for doing so.

Are cats critters FD? You still have not answered!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:54am

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:36am

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:54am:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Ouch! Monk gets pwned....again.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Better still, limit it to brand new house packages and which will increase supply and stop them using that as a throwaway line in any of these debates. ;)

Of course unless they don't want to increase supply in order to keep the value of their investments high ;)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:54am

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Negative gearing and brand new houses? Well that’s something which is available right now.

So now that you’re here please explain to everyone why you haven’t cashed in your share portfolio and used those funds to put your money where your big mouth is?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 10:46am

If they make that big a loss buying an existing property maybe they should forget about it and do something else.

TWO tax cuts for buying then selling an existing dwelling, ridiculous!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 11:31am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:54am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Oh look everyone - Last Nail logged off. Good. It will give him time to think before he posts further rubbish in this topic.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 11:49am

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 10:46am:

If they make that big a loss buying an existing property maybe they should forget about it and do something else.

TWO tax cuts for buying then selling an existing dwelling, ridiculous!

Here we go .... another dildo of a dick with no experience AND no idea about real estate investment.

Look everyone ... Drunk has seen fit to talk utter cr@p again.

Ok ... Drunk let’s look at your pitiful half baked idea for a second. How the hell do you expect ANY person to know if he/she will make a loss/make a profit/break even at some point in the future when they invest in any market?? There are no guarantees! Especially in this day and age!

So tell everyone what crystal ball you have there that’s obviously made you feel like you could expect such a thing from others (who unlike you have worked, have paid taxes and have invested in real estate without waiting for a handout by a parent they lived with for free all their lives).

Seriously Drunk...you can’t keep up in topics and it’s not JUST due to the fact that you’re old and you have long term health issues wrt alcohol. You also lack life experience and it shows. It’s getting annoying because in many topics we have to stop to explain the bleeding obvious before we can move on whenever you (or that uneducated and ignorant tosspot Frodo) is around. Perhaps you should start a forum that caters for people like you ie slower, older, uneducated and ignorant. Oh wait ... you already have one. My bad 😐

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 12:28pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 11:31am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:54am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Oh look everyone - Last Nail logged off. Good. It will give him time to think before he posts further rubbish in this topic.

I don't have a share portfolio. And I ask again what is the problem with LIMITING NG to brand new house and land packages so you can still buy the old dumps but you just won't have a competitive advantage over owner occupiers who can't benefit from generous tax concessions. SO I ask again what is the problem with that ?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 2:37pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

nah .. investor bring old houses back to life. You'd be the first to cry if you had to rent an old wreck

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 2:53pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 12:28pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 11:31am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:54am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Oh look everyone - Last Nail logged off. Good. It will give him time to think before he posts further rubbish in this topic.

I don't have a share portfolio.

Wait a second. What happened to them? You used to rave on about your shares on Yahoo. You even nauseatingly raved on about your mentor Warren Buffet every bloody day!

Please don’t tell me you’re sitting there right now with NO stocks, NO shares, NO property and you’re STILL renting!

In the 20 yrs (which I’ve known you) ... you do realise you could have paid your mortgage off. Yes?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:19pm

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 2:37pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

nah .. investor bring old houses back to life. You'd be the first to cry if you had to rent an old wreck

owner occupiers can do that too smith and they get to own it as well ;) These property hoarders recycling the same old dumps that were built 50 years ago are not doing anyone except themselves any favours !

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:24pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 2:53pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 12:28pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 11:31am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:54am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Oh look everyone - Last Nail logged off. Good. It will give him time to think before he posts further rubbish in this topic.

I don't have a share portfolio.

Oi!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:27pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 2:53pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 12:28pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 11:31am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:54am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Oh look everyone - Last Nail logged off. Good. It will give him time to think before he posts further rubbish in this topic.

I don't have a share portfolio.

Now you are employing a strawman fallcy. What's wrong with limiting NG to brand new house and land packages ? You still get to invest in a property using those generous tax concessions whilst adding to the supply ;)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:35pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:27pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 2:53pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 12:28pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 11:31am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:54am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Oh look everyone - Last Nail logged off. Good. It will give him time to think before he posts further rubbish in this topic.

I don't have a share portfolio.

I asked you a question.

Why can’t you answer it?

Why are you choosing to deflect instead?

You sat on Yahoo for years preaching the virtues of Warren Buffet as though he was your god! You spruiked the virtues of investing in shares and boldly told us all that shares were more important than buying a home to put a roof over your head.

You even posted how stupid the rest of us were for wasting our money by buying homes because one day the property bubble would burst and you’d jump in and buy up as many properties as you liked for next to peanuts.

Now stop being a liar and stop being a hypocrite. What has happened since? Did you lose all your money betting on the precarious stock market?

Edit : And what makes you look like an even BIGGER hypocrite and fool is this 👉 Warren Buffet aka your god is and has always been best buddies with Bill Gates and Big Pharma. In fact he himself invested in vaccines. So next time you post about plandemics and fake news and Big Pharma .... you best be ready to face the reality that you are also attacking one of its most prominent proponents and collaborative stake holders ie Warren Buffet...the very guy you foolishly based your entire financial security on.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:13pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:35pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:27pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 2:53pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 12:28pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 11:31am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:54am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Oh look everyone - Last Nail logged off. Good. It will give him time to think before he posts further rubbish in this topic.

I don't have a share portfolio.

you're the one changing it. refer to my original post and stop derailing the thread with your red herrings. 80% of respondants on Q&A poll agree with abolishing NG completely. Don't sound like you got too many allies Lisa :D LOL

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Baronvonrort on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:23pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:27pm:

What's wrong with limiting NG to brand new house and land packages ? You still get to invest in a property using those generous tax concessions whilst adding to the supply ;)

If people can't negative gear used housing how is that going to help increase the number of rental properties?

Last time i checked we aren't building enough new homes to meet demand.

Then you have the problem of shoddy workmanship in newer buildings try Google for Mascot Tower this is more widespread than reported.

I would prefer to invest in something that has been standing for over 50 years with no problems than take a chance on dodgy newer builds.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:27pm

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:23pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:27pm:

What's wrong with limiting NG to brand new house and land packages ? You still get to invest in a property using those generous tax concessions whilst adding to the supply ;)

The problem is not whether they are rental or owner occupier. The problem is we need to build more housing and that's what I am trying to address whereas people like Lisa have ulterior motives which is satisfying their own greed :(

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:36pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:19pm:

owner occupiers can do that too smith and they get to own it as well ;)

By a large percentage, most buyers want to walk in and not do a thing. The ones that like a fixer upper are the same ones who you usually cry about, because once they fix their house, they move onto another.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:39pm

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:23pm:

I would prefer to invest in something that has been standing for over 50 years with no problems than take a chance on dodgy newer builds.

Finally, something we agree on.

My wife once worked at 12 month old tower complex in Brisbane ... they had one window blow right out and fall 14 floors to the ground below, and most others leaked every time it rained. Try getting builders back to fix that in a high rise :D :D :D :D

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:14pm

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:36pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:19pm:

owner occupiers can do that too smith and they get to own it as well ;)

they don't need a landlord to do that for them smith. You sound as stupid as Lisa now :D LOL

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:18pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:13pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:35pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:27pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 2:53pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 12:28pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 11:31am:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:54am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Oh look everyone - Last Nail logged off. Good. It will give him time to think before he posts further rubbish in this topic.

I don't have a share portfolio.

you're the one changing it.

So you did lose all your money and now you’re sitting there ... STILL renting and STILL whinging about those of us who DID invest in housing by looking at putting a roof over our heads AS WELL AS a roof over the heads of our children. In fact my 2 older kids as well as my step-daughter are property owners now BECAUSE we (as responsible forward thinking parents) did our due diligence and invested in HOUSING whilst they were just kids.

Tell you what Last Nail ... I think ALL your posts re housing are driven by jealousy and/or resentment because you listened to a fraudulent spruiker like Buffet and your misplaced trust in said fraud caused you to stumble and fail. I honestly don’t feel sorry for you because we’ve had close to 20 years of arguing back and forth over real estate and today everyone reading this topic now knows exactly where you’re at and why.

I just can’t believe you Last Nail! You could have EASILY paid off a house in all the years I’ve battled you online over the importance of home ownership. Right now I hope your kids have the good fortune to marry into families whose parents were not as reckless as you were. I don’t like seeing ANY child suffer because of slack arse parents.

Ok ... let’s try and move on knowing why you have your hell bent perspective against those who have NOT failed in securing home ownership and have NOT failed their children in helping them also.

But for that to happen you need to take responsibility for the fact that YOU have made poor choices regarding your finances and these have negatively impacted both your life and your children’s future.

Edit : For the record I’m not angry with you. I am however VERY frustrated with you. You should be in a completely different financial situation.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:20pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:14pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:36pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:19pm:

owner occupiers can do that too smith and they get to own it as well ;)

they don't need a landlord to that for them smith. You sound as stupid as Lisa now :D LOL

what?? they ARE the landlords you dam cretin.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:29pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:27pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:23pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:27pm:

What's wrong with limiting NG to brand new house and land packages ? You still get to invest in a property using those generous tax concessions whilst adding to the supply ;)

Last Nail

People are deemed greedy in your mind for buying homes to :

1. house themselves
2. rent out to others in the community
3. ultimately hand over such rentals in 2. to their children so as to ensure they are also housed.

👆 That’s not being greedy Last Nail. That’s being responsible by doing everything you possibly can to help others AND especially help your kids! Dear God...if YOU don’t help YOUR kids...who will?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:38pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:29pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:27pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:23pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:27pm:

What's wrong with limiting NG to brand new house and land packages ? You still get to invest in a property using those generous tax concessions whilst adding to the supply ;)

you still don't address my issue of limiting NG to brand new house and land packages because you want your cake and eat it too simply because the old dumps are more valuable due to their location and once again prioritizing your greed over what is beneficial to the majority.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:48pm

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:23pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:27pm:

What's wrong with limiting NG to brand new house and land packages ? You still get to invest in a property using those generous tax concessions whilst adding to the supply ;)

Only idiots with SFA real estate experience would touch those new builds. They are setting themselves up for financial ruin in the long term.

1. The land value is the 1st issue. These properties are far from the city and far from the coast and water. You can only reach these areas by tolled motorways which attempt to cut the time taken to get there.
2. The quality of the build will not be there. It’s all cheap and quick/high turnover/quantity over quality etc.
3. In many cases ... those selling these types of properties ARE the builders/working with the builders. That’s right! The real estate agents are involved as joint stakeholders in both building and selling.
4. Over the next 10 years...these properties will be lucky to rise by 100K in value.
5. Those “owners” by then realise they’ve essentially been done over. Many face being stuck with negative equity issues.
6. In some instances .. entire suburbs are now facing building issues. Look up the outer sydney suburb of Jordan Springs for a clue. The suburb is built on mud and is slowly sinking. People with mortgages can’t even renew their property insurance policies and they can’t sell either because no one wants a house that’s sinking nor can a bank lend money to anyone wishing to buy said house because it fails the crucial essential criterion of lending which is this : there MUST be a current insurance policy on the building before finance can be formally approved.

NOTE : I’ve often said this but I’ll say it again 👉 my posts are based on the Sydney property market.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:48pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:00pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:38pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:29pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:27pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:23pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:27pm:

What's wrong with limiting NG to brand new house and land packages ? You still get to invest in a property using those generous tax concessions whilst adding to the supply ;)

So me taking care of my children instead of your children is your revised definition of me being greedy.

When are YOU going to take responsibility for YOUR poor financial decisions which have affected YOUR children?

It’s WHY I posted 👇 earlier to you:

Quote:

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:06pm

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:48pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Last Nail .... Freediver has asked this question a few times. You keep avoiding it so I’ve highlighted it for you. What’s your answer??

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:15pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:48pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Last Nail .... Freediver has asked this question a few times. You keep avoiding it so I’ve highlighted it for you. What’s your answer??

I have no idea what he is talking about. Please provide an example.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:17pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:00pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:38pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:29pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:27pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:23pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:27pm:

What's wrong with limiting NG to brand new house and land packages ? You still get to invest in a property using those generous tax concessions whilst adding to the supply ;)

do you keep dossiers on everyone do you Lisa ?? You are talking about stuff I only have vague recollections of and is of no relevance to the topic here. You need to get a life :D LOL

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:23pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:48pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 5:23pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 4:27pm:

What's wrong with limiting NG to brand new house and land packages ? You still get to invest in a property using those generous tax concessions whilst adding to the supply ;)

Now we get to the bottom of it. You want to prioritize your greed over someone who just wants ONE house to live in. Not only that you want to minimize your risk with a whole lot of corporate welfare thrown in with the mix that owner occupiers never ever get. If houses are not for people to live in then what are they for ?? In Australia they are for greedy people !!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:26pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:15pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:48pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Last Nail .... Freediver has asked this question a few times. You keep avoiding it so I’ve highlighted it for you. What’s your answer??

I have no idea what he is talking about. Please provide an example.

It's really not that complicated. But here's an example. You loose $10,000 over the financial year. Then the ATO sends you a $20,000 tax bill. You cannot pay it. You have to declare bankruptcy. Does that sound right to you? Or do you need me to fetch the crayons?

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:38pm

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:26pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:15pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:48pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Last Nail .... Freediver has asked this question a few times. You keep avoiding it so I’ve highlighted it for you. What’s your answer??

I have no idea what he is talking about. Please provide an example.

Then why are you taking on so much risk then ?? No one is twisting your arm but you want to offload your risk onto other tax payers and then benefit from the capital gains. What do they say. Privatize the gains and socialize the losses. :D LOL

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:45pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:38pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:26pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:15pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:48pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Last Nail .... Freediver has asked this question a few times. You keep avoiding it so I’ve highlighted it for you. What’s your answer??

I have no idea what he is talking about. Please provide an example.

I am not taking risks. I am just trying to figure out if the critics of negative gearing are capable of thinking things through. As the economists like to say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Would you like to have another go at giving a straight answer to a simple question, or would you prefer to keep tapdancing?

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:49pm

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:45pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:38pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:26pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:15pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:48pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Last Nail .... Freediver has asked this question a few times. You keep avoiding it so I’ve highlighted it for you. What’s your answer??

I have no idea what he is talking about. Please provide an example.

I'm not suggesting to get rid of it completely. I'm saying to limit it to brand new house and land packages and that way you address the pollies pet throw-away line of there being supply issues. Problem solved. What's wrong with that ?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:53pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:45pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:38pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:26pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:15pm:

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 7:06pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 6:48pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 9:44am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 23^rd, 2023 at 8:24am:

They should limit NG to the first investment property only. After that you're on your own

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Last Nail .... Freediver has asked this question a few times. You keep avoiding it so I’ve highlighted it for you. What’s your answer??

I have no idea what he is talking about. Please provide an example.

You are also not answering the question. Why is that?

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 5:55am

If they made a loss why would they get a big tax bill?

It should not bankrupt them, they can sell the existing dwelling they bought expecting the ordinary taxpayer to subsidise. If investors are subsidised by other taxpayers then people looking to buy a home are disadvantaged.

Looking at the stats for home ownership it looks like subsidising investors is locking people out of buying a dwelling to live in.

Tell me, FD, is it good policy to subsidise investors over home owners? This does not get a single new dwelling built! Sounds like very bad use of the tax system!

Tell me FD, are cats critters?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 6:03am

Quote:

If they made a loss why would they get a big tax bill?

Because a bunch of economically illiterate fools demanded we abolish negative gearing.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 7:08am

Oh, so no subsidy for those buying established dwellings. That is as it should be. If they cannot afford the investment then they should not make it.

Tell me FD, are cats critters?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 7:16am

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 7:54am

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 7:16am:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Ok so Drunk STILL can’t answer the simple question. Such is the tragic condition of the notorious reclusive 80 yr old incel pensioner with not much in the way of active grey matter who goes to bed hugging his bootlegged unleaded concoction. His last remaining frozen brain cell sits with him in his cold bed wondering why his dodgy hip is giving him so much grief given the Antarctic conditions he foolishly chose to live in. The truth is ... he couldn’t afford anything anywhere given the pittance he had in old age and even that pittance was not something he had worked for. It existed only because his very old mother died leaving that small humble amount FOR him.

Such is the extent of Drunk’s “success” in real estate, in investing and in life really.

Edit : My bad - these days Drunk IS earning a little $$ on the side. How? By scamming online posters of $60.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:53am

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 6:03am:

Quote:

If they made a loss why would they get a big tax bill?

Because a bunch of economically illiterate fools demanded we abolish negative gearing.

No, just limit it to brand new house and land packages. It's not rocket science ;)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:57am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 7:54am:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 7:16am:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

So you only want to invest in prime real estate with generous corporate welfare given to you from other tax payers who are the ones you are denying ownership of these dwellings ? Is that how you read it too Lisa ?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:24am

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:53am:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 6:03am:

Quote:

If they made a loss why would they get a big tax bill?

Because a bunch of economically illiterate fools demanded we abolish negative gearing.

No, just limit it to brand new house and land packages. It's not rocket science ;)

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 10:18am

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 7:16am:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

They can always sell their investment property. I do not think it is a good idea for the taxoayers to bail out those who buy existing dwellings for gain.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 10:35am

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:24am:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:53am:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 6:03am:

Quote:

If they made a loss why would they get a big tax bill?

Because a bunch of economically illiterate fools demanded we abolish negative gearing.

No, just limit it to brand new house and land packages. It's not rocket science ;)

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

who are these people you keep talking about ? Are they owner occupiers ?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 11:07am

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 10:18am:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 7:16am:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

They can always sell their investment property. I do not think it is a good idea for the taxoayers to bail out those who buy existing dwellings for gain.

It is not a bailout Monk. No-one is suggesting giving them money.

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a hug tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Quote:

who are these people you keep talking about ? Are they owner occupiers ?

Anyone who might make a loss. An investor. A small business owner. etc. The same principles apply to them all. In fact it is the same principle behind the different income tax rates.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:25pm

NG is to reduce tax paid. Let the investor bear the risk.

When my partner left having almost destroyed the business I got no damn help! It was up to me to build the business up. Tax office rang me “You have to come Friday with $20,000 cash” so I went there with $500 cash—and arranged ATO to garnishee the settlement money on the big villa we co-owned. No bloody help, nor did I expect any! I paid all the creditors and saved all the employee’s jobs.

Why the hell should someone buying an existing dwelling with the aim of holding ir for long enough to make a good capital gain they would pay stuff all tax on be given help? Stuff that!

There are so many renters at the mercy of landlords, can get turfed out, rent raised etc that something needs to be done. Why not stop helping greedy bastards and help homebuyers?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:26pm

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:27pm

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:26pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

who says they lose money? :D :D

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:28pm

{sob} the investors lose NG.

So let them buy something they can hold and pay tax on.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:33pm

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:27pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:26pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

who says they lose money? :D :D

Never mind John, no-one expects you to have any principles.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:36pm

Getting the taxpayer to subsidise greedy arseholes to buy a property to reduce PAYE then sell and pay bugger all capital gains tax. That is “principals” FD?

Are cats critters FD?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:37pm

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:26pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Tax Dept should send tax bills according to people’s incomes.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:38pm

Are you having difficulty understanding the question Monk?

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:40pm

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:33pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:27pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:26pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

who says they lose money? :D :D

Never mind John, no-one expects you to have any principles.

nice backpeddle FD ... now just keep that momentum going

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:44pm

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:38pm:

Why did they lose money, FD?

Are cats critters, FD?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:44pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:38pm:

Why did they lose money, FD?

Are cats critters, FD?

It's doesn't matter why they lost it. Small businesses and investments lose money for all sorts of reasons.

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm

If they genuinely lost money why would the Tax Dept send them a big bill?

Are cats critters, FD?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:15pm

So if you make a real loss you don’t get a big tax bill?

Are cats critters, FD?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 7:57pm

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:38pm:

do you ??

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:34pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 7:57pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:38pm:

do you ??

Of course not. Only an idiot would demand a person with no income pay the same income tax as a person earning half a million.

Are you that idiot?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:36pm

Did you pull those numbers out of your arse fd

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:40pm

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

That people who invest in rental properties should not be singled out to pay extra taxes compared to people who invest in shares, small businesses, other forms of property etc. The same principles that apply to all other business activities should apply to rental properties.

And if, like Smith, you are completely lacking in principles, put it this way: rents will go up, not down, if you make rental property owners pay more tax. This is just another Greens idea that will actually harm the people it is intended to benefit, which is what always happens when the economically illiterate get their way.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:52pm

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

Are you drunk again? :D

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:25am

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:52pm:

Are you drunk again? :D

Is Dumbarse Drunk trolling around in this topic again?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03am

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

Are you drunk again? :D

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:45am

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

You don't have to. Just invest in brand new house and land packages and you get to keep those concessions otherwise recycling the same old dumps is not achieving anything that benefits the economy as a whole ;)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:59am

Quote:

otherwise recycling the same old dumps is not achieving anything that benefits the economy as a whole

Do you think making rental properties available for people benefits the economy? What do you think is going to happen to people who wish to rent a house if the government starts using the tax system to discourage investors from making those rentals available? Do you understand how this might actually harm the people you claim to be trying to help?

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 10:00am

Same tax laws would apply to share traders.

If you buy shares and property a loss from one can be offset by losses on another but not reducing your primary income & tax due.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 12:13pm

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:59am:

Quote:

otherwise recycling the same old dumps is not achieving anything that benefits the economy as a whole

for every renter that becomes an owner occupier is one less renter ;)

and you can desist in resorting to using straw-man fallacies like you always do. It doesn't add anything to the argument :(

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 12:30pm

Quote:

for every renter that becomes an owner occupier is one less renter

Are you suggesting the government should encourage this by making it more difficult for them to find a rental property?

Have you considered that the increase in rent resulting from this ignorant policy might actually prevent these people from ever owning their own home?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 12:36pm

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 12:30pm:

Quote:

for every renter that becomes an owner occupier is one less renter

are you saying that every renter should be forced to rent forever because you get an unfair tax advantage that encourages you to sit on those rental properties ?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 1:37pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 12:36pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 12:30pm:

Quote:

for every renter that becomes an owner occupier is one less renter

are you saying that every renter should be forced to rent forever because you get an unfair tax advantage that encourages you to sit on those rental properties ?

No.

There is no tax advantage and it is not unfair. Every other investment type is treated exactly the same way. Only allowing deductions for certain types of investments, eg new properties, would create some rather silly incentives. It is not forcing renters to do anything. The lower rents that result make it easier for them to save up and buy their own home.

Do you understand yet how abolishing negative gearing would actually harm the people it is intended to help?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 2:03pm

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 1:37pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 12:36pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 12:30pm:

Quote:

for every renter that becomes an owner occupier is one less renter

are you saying that every renter should be forced to rent forever because you get an unfair tax advantage that encourages you to sit on those rental properties ?

One could easily argue it's not an investment that is of the interest to the general public when you keep recycling the same old dumps and not investing in new stock and I believe only Australia offers such generous tax concessions compared with the rest of the world.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 4:41pm

No NG means investors no longer have an unfair advantage over homebuyers. Buyers of shares etc treated the same way.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 5:13pm

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 2:03pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 1:37pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 12:36pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 12:30pm:

Quote:

for every renter that becomes an owner occupier is one less renter

are you saying that every renter should be forced to rent forever because you get an unfair tax advantage that encourages you to sit on those rental properties ?

You could argue that providing rental accommodation is against the public interest, but you wouldn't, because you are not that stupid, right?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 5:43pm

The house would be there whether the “investor” bought or not!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 5:49pm

Quote:

The house would be there whether the “investor” bought or not!

Not forever. And not for rent. Not sure why you think having a bunch of owner occupiers selling houses to each other is going to help the people who have been made homeless by your idiotic policy.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Sir lastnail on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:12pm

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 5:13pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 2:03pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 1:37pm:

Sir lastnail wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 12:36pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 12:30pm:

Quote:

for every renter that becomes an owner occupier is one less renter

are you saying that every renter should be forced to rent forever because you get an unfair tax advantage that encourages you to sit on those rental properties ?

You could argue that providing rental accommodation is against the public interest, but you wouldn't, because you are not that stupid, right?

Not if you prioritize ownership over rental which NG does not do ;)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:13pm

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

Are you drunk again? :D

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Irrelevant what I think. They already send people big tax bills and manygobroke whilstothersdon't. If you're broke because of it it's your own stupid fault. The tax office doesn't care either way.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:30pm

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 5:49pm:

Quote:

The house would be there whether the “investor” bought or not!

Not forever. And not for rent. Not sure why you think having a bunch of owner occupiers selling houses to each other is going to help the people who have been made homeless by your idiotic policy.

Actually, because investors are advantaged rents have been zooming lately! You think the people renting now wouldn’t buy homes? Whatever made you think that?

You have not made a decent argument that people investing in existing homes need NG.

Tell me FD, are cats critters? You don’t seem to be able to say!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:00pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:30pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 5:49pm:

Quote:

The house would be there whether the “investor” bought or not!

Not forever. And not for rent. Not sure why you think having a bunch of owner occupiers selling houses to each other is going to help the people who have been made homeless by your idiotic policy.

Actually, because investors are advantaged rents have been zooming lately! You think the people renting now wouldn’t buy homes? Whatever made you think that?

That is not what I said Monk. Let's try again.

If you use the tax system to create a disincentive for providing rental properties, rents will go up. If rents go up, they will be even poorer, and will take longer to save up for a deposit on their own home, if that is even possible. That extra tax income you think is coming from the wealthy will actually be coming from the most vulnerable. You will harm the people you claim to be helping. It always happens when the economically illiterate try to come up with good ideas.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03pm

John Smith wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:13pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

Are you drunk again? :D

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Irrelevant what I think. They already send people big tax bills and manygobroke whilstothersdon't. If you're broke because of it it's your own stupid fault. The tax office doesn't care either way.

Yes, fortunately it is irrelevant. But you might stop sprouting idiotic BS if you try thinking before posting.

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:23pm

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:13pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

Are you drunk again? :D

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Irrelevant what I think. They already send people big tax bills and manygobroke whilstothersdon't. If you're broke because of it it's your own stupid fault. The tax office doesn't care either way.

The only one sprouting idiotic bullshit is you. You think your red herring about driving people broke with a tax cheque is a substitute for logic? You're a cretin

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:34pm

Five Foot Five Frodo’s last drug fried brain cell is still self projecting on repeat.

Situation normal 😂🤣😆

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:37pm

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:59am:

Quote:

otherwise recycling the same old dumps is not achieving anything that benefits the economy as a whole

Tell me when you’re ready Freediver. I’ll produce the recent article which proves the brutal reality of your point. Cheers.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 11:09pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:34pm:

Five Foot Five Frodo’s last drug fried brain cell is still self projecting on repeat.

Situation normal 😂🤣😆

John Smith is not Frodo who is likely a figment of your drugged-up imagination.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 11:17pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:25am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:52pm:

Are you drunk again? :D

Is Dumbarse Drunk trolling around in this topic again?

😂🤣😆

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 5:08am

John Smith wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:23pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:13pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

Are you drunk again? :D

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Irrelevant what I think. They already send people big tax bills and manygobroke whilstothersdon't. If you're broke because of it it's your own stupid fault. The tax office doesn't care either way.

The only one sprouting idiotic bullshit is you. You think your red herring about driving people broke with a tax cheque is a substitute for logic? You're a cretin

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 7:59am

Is it a good idea that 31%¹ and growing² of all families are renters? These renters have no protection and can be evicted at the statutory notice for evictions?

I do not think it is a good idea to help investors over home owners.

If people voluntarily take on huge debt the consequences are on them, not other taxpayers including the renters who can no longer afford a home of their own.

Investors will have to carry the costs until they sell the existing home they invested in—i.e. it will be a real investment not a dodgy tax planning scheme.

Notes:

1. aihw.gov.au of 2021

2. savings.com.au

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 8:16am

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 5:08am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:23pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:13pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

Are you drunk again? :D

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Irrelevant what I think. They already send people big tax bills and manygobroke whilstothersdon't. If you're broke because of it it's your own stupid fault. The tax office doesn't care either way.

The only one sprouting idiotic bullshit is you. You think your red herring about driving people broke with a tax cheque is a substitute for logic? You're a cretin

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Oh look everyone! Five Foot Five Frodo can’t answer any question you give him. His last drug fried brain cell gets stumped and he either posts a 1 liner consisting of abuse OR the tosspot logs off in cyber fear. 😂🤣😆

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 8:25am

JohnSmith clearly is not Frodo who is likely a figment of your drug-damaged brain.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 8:32am

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 5:08am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:23pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:13pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

Are you drunk again? :D

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Irrelevant what I think. They already send people big tax bills and manygobroke whilstothersdon't. If you're broke because of it it's your own stupid fault. The tax office doesn't care either way.

The only one sprouting idiotic bullshit is you. You think your red herring about driving people broke with a tax cheque is a substitute for logic? You're a cretin

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Who is it sending bankrupt FD? Or do you think making crap up is a substitute for a brain?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 8:45am

It is sending bankrupt those who took on too much debt. That is beneficial.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 8:53am

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 8:45am:

It is sending bankrupt those who took on too much debt. That is beneficial.

they won't go bankrupt. Not if they have at least half a brain, which FD seems to be missing. They'll sell the investment property before it comes to that.

Which is why they are calling to remove NG in the first place. :D :D

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 8:58am

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 5:08am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:23pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:13pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

Are you drunk again? :D

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Irrelevant what I think. They already send people big tax bills and manygobroke whilstothersdon't. If you're broke because of it it's your own stupid fault. The tax office doesn't care either way.

The only one sprouting idiotic bullshit is you. You think your red herring about driving people broke with a tax cheque is a substitute for logic? You're a cretin

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Oh look everyone! Read 👆

Five Foot Five Frodo STILL can’t answer any question you give him. His last drug fried brain cell gets so stumped that he :

1. posts a 1 liner consisting of abuse

OR

2. logs off in cyber fear

OR

3. will ask the very same question back to you

😂🤣😆

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 9:04am

JohnSmith afraid of you??? LOL!

He is off to manage his business.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by mothra on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 9:07am

Yet more foul cyber-bullying from Lisa, pretending to care so much about suicide rates.

What would Jesus do?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 9:10am

Poll Added :D

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 9:16am

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 9:04am:

JohnSmith afraid of you??? LOL!

He is off to manage his business.

😂🤣😆😂🤣😆😂🤣😆😂🤣😆😂🤣😆😂🤣😆😂🤣😆😂🤣😆

Go back to bed demented dumbarse! Idiot!

Casual tiling and only cash jobs too so as to evade tax and child support!

Oh and the occasional drug deal! That’s ALL he’s ever done in life! Oh and he’s a HOBOSEXUAL... he uses women to park his arse overnight!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 9:39am

Try not being stupid, hard tho that is for you.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 9:41am

mothra wrote on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 9:07am:

Yet more foul cyber-bullying from Lisa, pretending to care so much about suicide rates.

What would Jesus do?

Drive Larry from the Temple? Crucify him? Maybe Larry was one of the three thieves crucified with old JayCee?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 9:47am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 9:16am:

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 9:04am:

JohnSmith afraid of you??? LOL!

He is off to manage his business.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 9:47am

freediver wrote on Jun 26^th, 2023 at 5:08am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:23pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 8:13pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 25^th, 2023 at 9:03am:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 9:52pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 8:40pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:17pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 1:04pm:

John Smith wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 24^th, 2023 at 12:47pm:

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

are you saying the tax dept doesn't do that already?? ;D ;D ;D

Some taxes depend on how much money you actually make.

and some don't ... your point?

Are you drunk again? :D

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Irrelevant what I think. They already send people big tax bills and manygobroke whilstothersdon't. If you're broke because of it it's your own stupid fault. The tax office doesn't care either way.

The only one sprouting idiotic bullshit is you. You think your red herring about driving people broke with a tax cheque is a substitute for logic? You're a cretin

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bam on Jun 28^th, 2023 at 6:13pm

Regarding negative gearing, there appears to be an unstated assumption that all properties where negative gearing is claimed are being rented out on the private rental market.

This assumption is false.

Some properties where negative gearing is claimed are used as Airbnbs and other short-term rentals. This is an abuse of negative gearing.

Other homes are not rented out. It is legal to have a property that's unoccupied while claiming negative gearing tax breaks. The property could be on the rental market but not currently occupied. The property could be being repaired after a particularly bad tenant has damaged the property and repairs are needed to make the property habitable. These are usually legitimate. The property could be sitting idle because the owner wants to keep it empty for various reasons. This is not legitimate, but is another abuse of the negative gearing tax break, if it is claimed.

This is why, if negative gearing is to be retained, it should have a strict activity test imposed. No Airbnbs. No empty properties just because they can afford to leave it empty. Though I prefer to see it abolished entirely, and replaced with less generous tax breaks that cannot be applied against other income unless the property is sold with an overall loss. The property owners still get a tax break, but cannot abuse it.

The sale of property brings me to another issue, the capital gains discount. This is a bigger problem for the housing market than negative gearing. Hold a property for 12 months, get a 50% discount on tax, with no activity test? This is far too generous and is grossly distorting the housing market.

The capital gains discount should be slashed, reduced to a 20% discount if it is sold after it has been leased to tenants for 10 years. Note the activity test. Empty homes don't qualify. Neither do Airbnbs. If the house is not used as actual housing, then the clock is stopped on the discount.

Furthermore, the 25% discount would only be available to Australian citizens and permanent residents. To tighten up the rules further, ban non-resident foreigners from buying Australian housing.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 28^th, 2023 at 8:08pm

Hey Bam, long time no see!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 8:10am

Quote:

Some properties where negative gearing is claimed are used as Airbnbs and other short-term rentals. This is an abuse of negative gearing.

;D

Why do you think that?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bam on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 9:11am

freediver wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 8:10am:

Quote:

Some properties where negative gearing is claimed are used as Airbnbs and other short-term rentals. This is an abuse of negative gearing.

Why do you think that?

Negative gearing is supposed to be used to encourage investment in the private rental market.

Short-stay accommodations do not meet that criterion.

Are you suggesting that negative gearing should be accessible for all short-stay accommodation including hotels and motels?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bam on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 9:14am

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 28^th, 2023 at 8:08pm:

Hey Bam, long time no see!

I have been busy dealing with other matters. With a new, better (though not perfect) government elected last year, I felt less need to be posting on here.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 10:15am

Nice to “see” you anyway!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 5:55pm

Bam wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 9:11am:

freediver wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 8:10am:

Quote:

Some properties where negative gearing is claimed are used as Airbnbs and other short-term rentals. This is an abuse of negative gearing.

Why do you think that?

Negative gearing is supposed to be used to encourage investment in the private rental market.

What makes you think that?

Quote:

Are you suggesting that negative gearing should be accessible for all short-stay accommodation including hotels and motels?

It should and does apply to all investment and business activity. You get the same treatment if you borrow money to buy shares or set up a dry cleaning shop.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bam on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 6:43pm

freediver wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 5:55pm:

Bam wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 9:11am:

Are you suggesting that negative gearing should be accessible for all short-stay accommodation including hotels and motels?

It should and does apply to all investment and business activity.

Why should taxpayers subsidise other people's get rich schemes? Why is it acceptable for losses to be claimed in full but the gains to be taxed only half?

Why is it acceptable for rich people to buy up existing homes to leave them empty on purpose or turn them into Airbnbs for other rich people when tents are going up in parks because people can't find anywhere to live?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 7:57pm

Bam wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 6:43pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 5:55pm:

Bam wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 9:11am:

Are you suggesting that negative gearing should be accessible for all short-stay accommodation including hotels and motels?

It should and does apply to all investment and business activity.

Why should taxpayers subsidise other people's get rich schemes?

It's not a subsidy, any more than a tax free income tax threshhold is a subsidy for laziness. Do you have any real questions, or are you going to spend all your time asking me to explain your meaningless spin?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:47am

Of course it is a subsidy. NG reduces the investor’s—some yuppy no doubt—income tax then later he sells it and pays bugger all tax. And all he does is buy and sell an existing dwelling. He may not even rent it out.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:49am

Hey Monk, do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:00am

Do you think, FD, that tax payers should pay big subsidies to those that are just minimising tax? This invidious scheme has locked homeownership out of the question for increasing numbers of Australians.

These people do N O T H I N G to earn the subisidies (income tax and capital gains tax subsidies.)

You talk of businessmen earning subsidies: what bullshit, when I was rescuing my first business that was almost destroyed by my then business partner I not only got no subsidy I had to pay $1000/month to pay of overdue tax.

You do not know what you are talking about, FD. You only try to make a point with your question which is a gross misstatement of what happens! These people make no loss—they still get their inflated wages + bonuses etc and merely try to reduce income tax by claiming interest etc on buying an established dwelling, then pay stuff all capital gains tax later.

Meantime, because of this lurk, this subsidy, ordinary Australians are increasingly locked out of home ownership. Stuff that, get rid of negative gearing and charge capital gains tax on the gains made selling the existing dwelling!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:03am

I don't think it is a subsidy. You would understand why if you could give a straight answer to this question.

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:04am

Of course it is a subsidy. You know nothing about this, obviously.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:15am

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:10am

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:04am:

Of course it is a subsidy. You know nothing about this, obviously.

No. it's not a subsidy. No more so than claiming work boots or uniforms as tax deductions. Our whole tax system is based on being able to deduct expenses from your income. Interest is just another expense

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:30am

Well, we can agree to differ on that: I think of it as a subsidy to investors that is depriving more and more Australians from owning their own home.

The interest paid, the loan taken out, are done to minimise PAYE by wealthy people looking to dodge tax. The loss that FD keeps rabbiting on about is not a real loss—he still has his main income from working.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:36am

👆 Absolute ignorance!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:46am

Except I owned parts of 3 investment properties. Real ones, not your imaginary ones.

The stats about the real and large increase in renters are real,too. Homebuyers do not get a subsidy except if they sell they may be able to pay low capital gains tax—but that is not a subsidy to purchase.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:47am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:36am:

👆 Absolute ignorance!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:47am

Mr Brain Dead is at it again, repetitive posting. Proof of a severely limited mind. I guess it is the drugs but he may have been born learming impaired, i.e. stupid.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:52am

freediver wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 5:55pm:

Bam wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 9:11am:

freediver wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 8:10am:

Quote:

Some properties where negative gearing is claimed are used as Airbnbs and other short-term rentals. This is an abuse of negative gearing.

Why do you think that?

Negative gearing is supposed to be used to encourage investment in the private rental market.

What makes you think that?

[quote]Are you suggesting that negative gearing should be accessible for all short-stay accommodation including hotels and motels?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 9:08am

A dry cleaning shop provides your income. An investment property is to lower income tax.

The subsidies to investors is depriving increasing numbers of Australians the ability to buy their own home.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 9:19am

👆 Absolute ignorance of the next level dangerous variety.

Please ignore the toxic narcissist forum drunk. He’s muttering whilst intoxicated. Again.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 9:43am

Pity you can’t argue a case, eh 81 year old Larry?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 10:58am

👆 Absolute ignorance of the next level dangerous variety.

Please ignore the toxic narcissist forum drunk. He’s muttering whilst intoxicated. Again.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 11:06am

I have consumed no alcohol since a couple of beers on Saturday.

Larry lies all the time, it is a habit of his, he not having the mental acuity to argue a case.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 11:27am

Ozpol’s owner Freediver exposing Dumbarse Drunk as a liar 😂🤣😆

👇

FFBDADFC-44FC-4A6E-B361-8C4E4E1A107E.jpeg (131 KB | 8 )

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 11:51am

Only true if feral cats do not breed. Obviously FD was pissed he could not win the argument.

Calling my arguments lies was pretty low from FD.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by John Smith on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 12:01pm

I find it hilarious that FD calls others liars. The guy who makes up other peoples arguments for them out of thin air :D :D

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 12:45pm

freediver wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 5:55pm:

Bam wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 9:11am:

freediver wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 8:10am:

Quote:

Some properties where negative gearing is claimed are used as Airbnbs and other short-term rentals. This is an abuse of negative gearing.

Why do you think that?

Negative gearing is supposed to be used to encourage investment in the private rental market.

What makes you think that?

[quote]Are you suggesting that negative gearing should be accessible for all short-stay accommodation including hotels and motels?

It should and does apply to all investment and business activity. You get the same treatment if you borrow money to buy shares or set up a dry cleaning shop.[/quote]

Freediver

It’s a shame you felt you had to spoon feed the ignorant and the inexperienced.

PS Even then they’ll fail to read and comprehend what you’re saying as they’re simply just too dumb and too drunk or drugged 😐

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 2:30pm

LOL, FD never asked you about whatever irrelevant article you wanted him to ask you about.

Oh dear, larry is not worth FD’s attention! LOL!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:38pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 9:08am:

A dry cleaning shop provides your income. An investment property is to lower income tax.

The subsidies to investors is depriving increasing numbers of Australians the ability to buy their own home.

I realise this may come as a shock to someone like you, but people usually buy investments with the intention of making money, not just losing money in order to reduce their tax bill. In fact I don't think you can reduce your income tax by losing money on your investment property.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by The Grappler on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:41pm

What needs to be chopped is concessional capital gains on property, since clearly encouraging investment is not resolving the needs for actual housing. Negative gearing applies to any business venture - I got it with a theatre production company.

As usual - I have a plan .............................. (motherhood statement first) stamp out investors clawing the guts out of the available properties while blasting the cost of housing and of homing into the stratosphere - and put more Australian families into their own home as an immediate - let me say INSTANT - priority!! This may hurt some people short term, but it is now their turn, after decades of unwarranted profit - in the barrel of taking it on the chin!!

................. Vote 1 - Grappler Party .... We ARE The People .... and We Have A Plan! ........

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:46pm

Quote:

stamp out investors clawing the guts out of the available properties

So your plan is to make rentals scarce and unaffordable?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by The Grappler on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:49pm

freediver wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:46pm:

Quote:

stamp out investors clawing the guts out of the available properties

So your plan is to make rentals scarce and unaffordable?

Won't happen - only difference is the buyer market.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:04pm

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:46pm:

Quote:

stamp out investors clawing the guts out of the available properties

So your plan is to make rentals scarce and unaffordable?

Won't happen - only difference is the buyer market.

So your plan is to discourage people from buying investment properties and renting them out, but you think this won't make rental properties harder to come buy?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:32pm

Maybe some of us, not you evidently, would like a marketplace where homebuyers and those looking to reduce taxable income compete in an equal market place? Not an unequal one where investors are subsidised and homebuyers aren’t?

Are you for free markets FD?

Are cats critters FD?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:37pm

freediver wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:04pm:

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:46pm:

Quote:

stamp out investors clawing the guts out of the available properties

So your plan is to make rentals scarce and unaffordable?

Won't happen - only difference is the buyer market.

So your plan is to discourage people from buying investment properties and renting them out, but you think this won't make rental properties harder to come buy?

And more expensive... ::)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by The Grappler on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:38pm

freediver wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:04pm:

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:46pm:

Quote:

stamp out investors clawing the guts out of the available properties

So your plan is to make rentals scarce and unaffordable?

Won't happen - only difference is the buyer market.

So your plan is to discourage people from buying investment properties and renting them out, but you think this won't make rental properties harder to come buy?

... only because they will be replaced by owned properties....... and the rental crisis will ease and more families will be in their own homes, and the incentive on the banks to continually raise porices via their loaning processes will be lowered....

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:44pm

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:38pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:04pm:

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:46pm:

Quote:

stamp out investors clawing the guts out of the available properties

So your plan is to make rentals scarce and unaffordable?

Won't happen - only difference is the buyer market.

So your plan is to discourage people from buying investment properties and renting them out, but you think this won't make rental properties harder to come buy?

Grappler YOU ARE DREAMING!

You need to attend a few auctions to see wtf is going on. We attended 3 auctions recently. ALL 3 properties sold to Chinese people who needed interpreters in order to understand wtf was being told to them.

Aussies can’t get a look in. Fact! Why? Money laundering is back on with a vengeance! That is why property prices in Sydney are still high. Note : I’m talking about Sydney proper (not the bogan outer west regions because the Chinese know not to touch those useless non performing areas).

Ya dig?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:56pm

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:38pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 6:04pm:

Grappler Racist Filth wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:49pm:

freediver wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 5:46pm:

Quote:

stamp out investors clawing the guts out of the available properties

So your plan is to make rentals scarce and unaffordable?

Won't happen - only difference is the buyer market.

So your plan is to discourage people from buying investment properties and renting them out, but you think this won't make rental properties harder to come buy?

How will reducing the number of available rental properties ease the rental crisis? Are the people who cannot avoid to pay the rent because of this idiotic policy just going to magically come by the money to buy a house?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Jovial Monk on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 7:37pm

Oh come on, renters will become homeowners!

All this HUGE subsidy to investors in existing housing does not create a single new dwelling!

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by JC Denton on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:26pm

if you wanted to actually solve housing issues in australia, massively cutting migration is the most obvious thing to do. the reason the government doesnt do this is because they don't want to solve the issue, because to them it's not an issue. cashed up boomers benefit from high land prices because they are home owners and landlords.

my rent was static during the covid era but exploded afterwards due to the govt ratcheting immigration levels to 400, 000 a year. giving a sh1t about negative gearing is fiddling around the edges, it's minor compared to available rental and housing supply being utterly swamped by unprecedented artifical population growth.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:36pm

Jovial Monk wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 7:37pm:

Oh come on, renters will become homeowners!

All this HUGE subsidy to investors in existing housing does not create a single new dwelling!

Do you think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bam on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:54pm

freediver wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 7:57pm:

Bam wrote on Jun 29^th, 2023 at 6:43pm:

Why should taxpayers subsidise other people's get rich schemes?

It's not a subsidy ...

You're not considering the capital gains discount.

Claiming negative gearing losses at FULL value, capital gains taxed at HALF value (after 12 months, with no activity test). If that's not a subsidy paid for by other taxpayers, what is it?

Negative gearing on its own isn't particularly problematic. Its the interaction of negative gearing with an excessively generous capital gains tax discount that's the real problem.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by JC Denton on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 6:35am

no its rental supply being squeezed to the tune of 400,000 new incumbents a year, you would have to f*king insane to ignore that

austalia's unaffordable rental and land markets are a feature, not a bug, of the people who have engineered them. the government doesn't want to help renters and doesn't want land to be cheaper, because their primary constituents, donors, and the individuals within the government themselves (who generally own sizable property portfolios) don't want it as it would come at the expense of their own net worth and profits. they are making no sincere effort to address the massive disparities between demand and supply that are at the heart of australia's so called housing 'crisis', even though they could fix it with the stroke of a pen (through material and permanent migration cuts), in the medium to long term, if they really cared.

this thread is a microcosm of the inanity of australian political discourse; hammer on autistically about some single factor issue while being painfully unaware of the bigger picture.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:10am

Quote:

You're not considering the capital gains discount.

That is not negative gearing, nor does it make negative gearing a subsidy.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:19am

JC Denton wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:26pm:

👆 Legend!

The only thing he didn’t mention was that those coming through the doors were Asians (mainly Chinese) and make no mistake THEY ARE LAUNDERING CCP BACKED MONEY AND BUYING UP WHATEVER REAL ESTATE IS LEFT. THAT’S WHY AUCTION RESULTS/REAL ESTATE PRICES IN SYDNEY ARE ESCALATING AS I TYPE!

We who are Australian turn up to auctions and it’s like fighting on some bizarre frontline AGAIN - a frontline to keep real estate in Australian hands.

THE LABOR FEDERAL GOVT DITHERS!

It must cut back on immigration.

Edit : The ONLY way for our Aussie born n bred kids to tap into the real estate market (ie the real estate which these Asian money launderers want) is this : for our kids to buy in/come in as landlords backed by mum n dad bank PLUS rental income. Otherwise they can’t get a loan AS OWNER OCCUPIERS. There’s just no other way now BECAUSE of the Asians mainly Chinese coming through our airports with CCP money that needs to be laundered. Australia is a joke in China right now as I type. It the the preferred international destination for effortless and successful money laundering operations.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by JC Denton on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:26am

yes, the utter non-enforcement re: foreign buyers is another issue, the government will do nothing about that as well. anything that upsets the land market racket will never be seriously addressed in any significant way. whatever solutions that are floated will inevitably only increase land prices, such as first home buyer grants which are a clandestine method to decrease affordability through the subsidiation of demand. it's all by design; the government doesn't want land to be affordable, bc it ostensibly 'benefits' in a grotesque, short-term and avaricious sense boomers, their property developer donor mates, and themselves.

in reality inflated land markets have a strangulating effect on economies, deleteriously impact firm entry, ruin businesses and misdirect investment flows into an ultimately unproductive sector. land is a fundamental economic input and for the sake of productivity you want it to be as inexpensive as possible.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by freediver on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:38am

I appreciate all your efforts to change the subject, but none of the critics of negative gearing is brave enough to say whether they think it is a good idea for the tax department to send people bankrupt by giving them a huge tax bill in a year in which they actually lose money.

Why is that?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by JC Denton on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:39am

i don't give a sh1t eitherway about negative gearing. if it was removed or it stayed it may or may not impact land prices a bit, whoop dee doo. a study i saw ages ago showed it may only impact prices by as much as 5-8%, a proverbial drop of cum in john smith's lubed up asshole. even if it were removed it would not be removed for incumbent recipients, further limiting whatever impact this might have, positive or negative.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bobby. on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:44am

JC Denton wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:39am:

That sounds like something that IQ would write. :)

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by JC Denton on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:45am

who

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bobby. on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:49am

JC Denton wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:45am:

who

A poster called either IQ or IQSRLOW.

He doesn't post anymore.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by JC Denton on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:52am

i think i may remember him but i don't know

i was around about 10-12 years ago or more for the most part, i remember when you were bobbythebat and you used to talk repeatedly about lynching gay people, which was seriously good value

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bobby. on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:59am

JC Denton wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:52am:

i think i may remember him but i don't know

i was around about 10-12 years ago or more for the most part,
i remember when you were bobbythebat and you used to talk repeatedly about lynching gay people,
which was seriously good value

Lynching homos?

I don't remember that.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by JC Denton on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:00am

Bobby. wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:59am:

JC Denton wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:52am:

i think i may remember him but i don't know

i was around about 10-12 years ago or more for the most part,
i remember when you were bobbythebat and you used to talk repeatedly about lynching gay people,
which was seriously good value

Lynching homos?

I don't remember that.

"hang em and hang em high" was your tag line

it was great, bring back the bat

there was another guy here called tickfen who made tears come out of my eyes from laughter with some of his posts, he had a darkwing duck avatar

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bobby. on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:03am

JC Denton wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:00am:

Bobby. wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:59am:

JC Denton wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:52am:

i think i may remember him but i don't know

i was around about 10-12 years ago or more for the most part,
i remember when you were bobbythebat and you used to talk repeatedly about lynching gay people,
which was seriously good value

Lynching homos?

I don't remember that.

"hang em and hang em high" was your tag line

it was great, bring back the bat

therer was another guy here called tickfen who made tears come out of my eyes from laughter with some of his posts

Denton,

when you hang a man you better look at him:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZTe-_yqmhQ

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:18am

Bobby .... Denton is an old Yahoo poster. Ok?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bobby. on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:24am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:18am:

Bobby .... Denton is an old Yahoo poster. Ok?

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:39am

JC Denton wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:26am:

Ahh that!! The 3 tier tax system MUST overvalue land ie DIRT Why? Land tax rates and council rates ie these other taxes must continue to filter into the coffers of those WE foolishly elect. How else will these selfish a/holes be able to afford their ridiculous annual pay-rises, lurks and perks and comfortable superannuation schemes THROUGHOUT A GLOBAL RECESSION AND UNRESOLVED GLOBAL PANDEMIC???

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bobby. on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:40am

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:39am:

JC Denton wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:26am:

Ahh that!! The tax system MUST overvalue land ie DIRT Why? Land tax rates and council rates ie these other taxes must continue to filter into the coffers of those WE foolishly elect. How else will these selfish a/holes be able to afford their ridiculous annual pay-rises, lurks and perks and super comfortable superannuation schemes THROUGHOUT A GLOBAL RECESSION AND UNRESOLVED GLOBAL PANDEMIC???

In Victoria the Govt is interfering again with new land taxes
that will push up rents to hit the most disadvantaged people.
So much for his Marxism.
Dirty Dan doesn't care about the poor suckers who voted for him -
they gave him another 4 years of autocratic power.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/may/23/victoria-state-budget-winners-and-losers-free-kinder-new-taxes-on-businesses-and-the-end-to-native-timber-logging

Property investors

From January 2024, Victorians who currently pay land tax will be hit with an additional annual fee of $500 for landholdings worth between $50,000 and $100,000 and $975 for land worth between $100,000 and $300,000. For land worth more than $300,000, the $975 fee plus an additional hike of 0.1% will be charged. Family homes will remain exempt from land tax.

Pallas said 860,000 Victorian landowners will be affected, who will pay an average of $1,300 in additional taxes. He justified the hike by pointing to the land values increasing by 84% in the past decade. Rents have also increased by 25% over five years.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:41am

* Hate it when the page turns hence why I copy and paste over to a new page. Makes it easier for me to respond ...

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:19am:

JC Denton wrote on Jun 30^th, 2023 at 8:26pm:

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:42am

* Hate it when the page turns hence why I copy and paste over to a new page. Makes it easier for me to respond ...

JC Denton wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 8:26am:

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:50am

Bobby. wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 9:40am:

In Victoria the Govt is interfering again with new land taxes that will push up rents to hit the most disadvantaged people. So much for his Marxism.
Dirty Dan doesn't care about the poor suckers who voted for him - they gave him another 4 years of autocratic power.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/may/23/victoria-state-budget-winners-and-losers-free-kinder-new-taxes-on-businesses-and-the-end-to-native-timber-logging

Property investors

From January 2024, Victorians who currently pay land tax will be hit with an additional annual fee of $500 for landholdings worth between $50,000 and $100,000 and $975 for land worth between $100,000 and $300,000. For land worth more than $300,000, the $975 fee plus an additional hike of 0.1% will be charged. Family homes will remain exempt from land tax.

Pallas said 860,000 Victorian landowners will be affected, who will pay an average of $1,300 in additional taxes. He justified the hike by pointing to the land values increasing by 84% in the past decade. Rents have also increased by 25% over five years.

Dear God! My real estate knowledge and experience is only based on NSW and Sydney in particular (Sydney proper not the far flung bogan regions which have mysteriously become a part of Sydney over the past decade) as that’s where you will see results. So I’m glad you posted this Bobby if only to expose this Judas Iscariot’s degree of depravity!

He’s effectively sold out Victoria to Asians laundering money!

Victorians must surely be the biggest dumbarses in Australia to vote this money-hungry CCP brown nosing
grub into power. He’s the highest paid Premier in Australia and in Australian political history despite Victoria not being the biggest state in terms of land mass or population.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bam on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 10:07am

JC Denton wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 6:35am:

no its rental supply being squeezed to the tune of 400,000 new incumbents a year, you would have to f*king insane to ignore that

I don't ignore that. I discussed one issue, but that doesn't mean other things are not going on.

The interaction between negative gearing and the CGT discount has been with us for 23 years. It is a problem because it's a driver of wealth inequality. Their lack of any activity test is another problem. Properties do not have to be rented out or new homes built on newly-released land to qualify for these tax breaks.

Another issue - and this is the big one right now - is the huge number of vacant Australian homes that are not on the rental market.
* 350,000 properties are listed on Airbnb in Australia. More are listed on other short-stay markets.
* Some properties are unoccupied because cashed-up investors have bought them and chosen to leave them empty for the capital gains. They can afford to do so because our tax breaks for property lack any activity tests.
* About one million homes - 10% of our housing stock - was unoccupied on Census night in 2021. Many of these would have been temporarily unoccupied for various reasons. Others would have been permanently unoccupied with nobody living there.

Is there a housing shortage? No: see 350,000 Airbnbs for a reason. Is there a shortage of housing available for people to live in? Yes.

So how to fix?

* Introduce an activity test for property tax breaks so only properties that are rented out or newly-built on newly-released land qualify for negative gearing and the CGT discount. No vacant properties. No Airbnbs. (Replacing negative gearing with a less generous tax break should be considered if the activity test isn't sufficient.) The CGT discount remains at 50% ONLY if the home was built on newly-released land AND it was leased for 10 years before the property is sold. If only one activity test is met, the discount is 25%. If neither is met, no discount applies.
* Discourage Airbnbs except where the "host" lives on the premises or the property is newly-built on newly-released land.
* Stop non-resident foreigners buying Australian homes. Heavily tax vacant homes owned by non-resident foreigners to encourage them to divest or rent out.

Doing those should take some of the pressure off the housing market caused by the behaviour of investors.

Building more homes is also needed; this is obvious. This needs to be done carefully to allow owner-occupiers to buy homes. Schemes should include rent-buy arrangements, more public housing and the like.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Lisa Jones on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 10:11am

👆 Clearly some people are plain dumb and ignorant AND love to stay that way. These people are beyond help.

Let’s take a quick look at this beautiful kindergarten level statement by Bamby for example :

Stop non-resident foreigners buying Australian homes. Heavily tax vacant homes owned by non-resident foreigners to encourage them to divest or rent out.

No govt will support this. It’s political suicide for starters. I myself (I’m not even Chinese ffs) know how existing Chinese born Australians and their networks overseas in Communist China are getting around our current soft cock laws! 😩😳

The above highlighted measures by Bamby appear to be strict however they’re easily overcome by OVERSEAS Chinese who use their Chinese Australian networks to smuggle CPP money into laundering schemes which are real estate based (you get to launder millions more quickly). I even know HOW they do it. I’ve been told by filthy rich Chinese neighbours (who I’ve spent years trying to befriend through fruit and veg giving and taking in their bins and mail whilst they’re on holidays). These Chinese neighbours are very typical of most CCP loving Chinese born n bred people - they are very RACIST against Anglo Celtic Saxons and are here on a mission to invade via economic means.

Make no mistake! What we are seeing is an effortless economic takeover as we are outnumbered by millions of Chinese which have for decades been coming through via various Federal Govt means. Let’s recall Paul Keating who sold off thousands of Uni places overseas back in the late 1980’s to balance his books and who concurrently introduced Uni fees for Australian students. These Australian students couldn’t get into Uni because places had become allocated to overseas Uni students. This then pushed marks up which effectively excluded intelligent Aussie students and pushed them into inferior TAFE diploma courses instead. How’s that for a parallel to what’s happening in real estate Bamby?

Who remembers Juliar Gillard’s Golden Ticket scheme? Oh no one wants to mention that. But not only do we need to have this conversation we also need to point the blame exactly where it belongs.

I keep seeing the Labor party selling us out at every turn! The Liberal party are not much better but it’s FARKKING Labor which holds the gold medal.

And you clueless idiots voted Labor in! Well done! The very guy at the helm doesn’t give a sh1t about you! Oh well suffer! Hopefully you might learn for next time!

IF ANYONE dares to call me racist for posting the above then you are sadly mistaken. I’m Mediterranean blooded and my entire household represents the multi cultural diversity of Australian society. I refuse to be silenced when I see something which isn’t right. I have the right to speak up! Only people under arrest have the right to remain silent. I WILL therefore speak up.

Title: Re: If they are hell bent on keeping negative gearing.
Post by Bam on Jul 2^nd, 2023 at 1:54pm

Lisa Jones wrote on Jul 1^st, 2023 at 10:11am:

I keep seeing the Labor party selling us out at every turn! The Liberal party are not much better but it’s FARKKING Labor which holds the gold medal.

And you clueless idiots voted Labor in! Well done! The very guy at the helm doesn’t give a **** about you! Oh well suffer! Hopefully you might learn for next time!

Do you really think your beloved Liberal party are any better? Oh please. They are much worse. They were in government for 20 of the last 30 years. They allowed tainted money to flood into the country. They sat on their hands and did nothing. They refused to crack down on corruption. They even introduced a special class of visa to facilitate tainted money from cashed up foreigners. $5 million dollars and they could come in, with no questions asked where they got the money.

All this mess you're whining about has the Liberal party's grubby, corrupt fingers all over it. Labor's been in government for 13 months, and you somehow are deluded into thinking that Labor's responsible for everything you dislike that's been happening for years? Oh, the delusions.

If you're whining about "Labor party selling us out", open both eyes for a change. The Howard government is responsible for selling out more of our country than any federal government before or since: from forcing us to pay top dollar for our own gas, to selling off gold reserves at rock bottom prices, the Howard government's sorry record of selling us out has cause a lot of damage to the country that will take decades to repair. As for the current government, take a close look at how both major parties vote on legislation. It will disabuse you of the notion that somehow your beloved Liberal party are opposing everything you disagree with. Both major parties often vote together on legislation. I can tell you've never actually looked closely at this.