- Joined
- 22 June 2008
- Posts
- 561
- Reactions
- 0
Good point, we also have set up a trust, though that's about as far as I've got so far.They should get whatever they need for education and travel and the lot when they're about 40, 25 is too young for most.
This money is for security not to take away their will to do it on their own, it's hard to set it up that way though, I've got a Trust that will be administered by a lawyer, but it's all complicated and I'm not really happy with it yet.
Good point, we also have set up a trust, though that's about as far as I've got so far.
cheers
True too, though if they have no access to it, to some degree it would defeat the purpose.The hardest thing is to set it up so it's for their future without them thinking, I dont have to work because I've already got a house and they bludge, that could actually ruin someones life by taking away thier incentive.
Fat chance Nunlawyers are too complicated and costly to set this kind of deal up guys
just donate all assets and monies to my convent and attach a note with all future instructions in it
happy to do my bit for mankind
a.nun
My hope is that it would give them enough security to be able to pursue the kind of work they love
cheers
Yeah, at some point you just have to let go and trust them to make their own decisions. Sometimes too much restriction can be more harmful than good.I drove myself nuts trying to cover all the bases, but you just cant .
Yeah, at some point you just have to let go and trust them to make their own decisions. Sometimes too much restriction can be more harmful than good.
..........Boy have we gone way off topic
cheers
Worthwhile that we scared off all the property bullsRight on both counts - worthwhile though.
Not at all. You are leaping to conclusions based on some sort of cognitive bias.
I don't think there is any "right" to home/land ownership whatsoever. Where did you get that idea? I have no problem with people renting. I choose to rent myself as it suits me right now.
However overpriced basic accommodation filters down to rent levels. People are entitled to a fair return on the value of their asset, so rent should reflect the asset value. Ergo, high prices equals high rents.
Witness - what has happened to rents in Oz over the last few years? Rents have totally outstripped inflation. What you could rent in Perth for $250 4 years ago is now circa $450 or more.
Perth as a society functioned perfectly well with some of the most inexpensive real estate and therefore rents in the country. Now it is among the most expensive. Why? (Yes I know the economics etc)
Fantastic if you own property. But if you're starting out, it is much more difficult than previous generations endured. There is something wrong with an economic policy that actually encourages this in my opinion.
You can still get rich in property without massive speculative price inflation, just might take a bit longer.
What I do object to very strongly is government actions in propping up house prices.
If we are to be Keynesian style interventionists, house prices should never have been allowed to get out of control. Policy would have tried to prevent it.
However if we are to be Austrian style laissez faire capitalists, then let them rip, but let people deal with the consequences of an Austrian style bust. Let housing, as a market, find its level without gu'mint support. Let the market do its job of price discovery.
But gu'mint policy flip flops from laissez faire to interventionism in order to perpetuate the house price boom.
I and others don't believe this is healthy or fair to all in the long run.
Personally, I'm in favour of Austrian style economics. I have no problems with a price boom, but am prepared to deal with the consequences of a bust, both in the sense of protecting assets and as an opportunity.
Current day investors are used to the nanny state nipple of middle class welfare and go whining to the government to bail them out of trouble. pffft.
Ultimately this type of economics cannot survive without unintended consequences.
Sub-prime within the industry is regarded as any exposure where the borrower has limited or no capacity to repay - capacity to repay is a seperate issue to LVR.You don't agree that 93-97% LVR is sub-prime?
Someone posted a US chart that indicated that anything above 80 or 85% LVR was classed as sub-prime, not sure where is is now.
You've missed the point - LMIs have reduced their LVR exposures already, and in Australia we did not promote NGS > 95% LVR loans in the first place, unlike the US.Yes, I do realise that. LMI would not be needed if LVR were capped at 80%..........100-110% LVR's were just stupid..........LMI is mostly to allow people to borrow more on less deposit...........Now why would most need to do that if house prices were affordable.
Given that tightened lending practices have still allowed for growth in prices thus far this year, the point is rather moot.Is it like the chicken and the egg? Did increased LMI and LVR from the 90's cause an inflationary effect on prices? or were they a result of increased prices?
Seems simple to me, if people can borrow more on the same income and deposit, they will........if buyers have more to spend, they'll push prices up. Mind you I'm no expert on bank lending
In Victoria they wouldn't if the TOL is noted as "for natural love and affection"Do they pay stamp duty on that ?
the money is on China alone
and there lies the problem
Kincella, for those true believers in the China & India phenomenon I wouldnt waste my money on housing. Go Buy BHP, RIO, BSL, OST etc. What they produce is in a lot shorter supply than Australian housing. If China does boom for the next 30 years I guarantee you'll make a better return with those stocks.
My post was 100% on the money as we can see by your oh so defensive response. I dont give a rats how hard you worked, those who revell in a residential property boom are a-holes in my opinion, it locks the young out or forces them to take crushing mortgages.
I'd be quite happy if my residential properties halved in price tomorrow.
Less rates and the kids would be able to get in.
Those who call it paradise are selfish morons.
hello,
i'm with you Kincella, going to put these trolls on ignore the contradictions are outrageous
i reckon the thread would have far more substance and helpful discussion/ideas about property investing if some of these trolls were silenced
how we looking brothers, the biggest financial event since 1929, are prices still 8x average income, paradise
thankyou
professor robots
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?