- Joined
- 3 July 2009
- Posts
- 27,709
- Reactions
- 24,656
Yep, the big issues before the last election that got labor in, were Scott Morrison and housing unaffordability.400 thousand migrants predicted too.
And asset owners/capital win either way.Yep, the big issues before the last election that got labor in, were Scott Morrison and housing unaffordability.
It wont be long before Morrison is out of the equation and the other issue becomes an even bigger issue IMO, as you say 400,000 migrants adds a lot of upward pressure.
I just don't see any downward pressures on inflation, other than those on the bottom rung of the ladder falling off and they don't spend much anyway.
Everyone further up the food chain, is just charging more, to compensate.
Until the extra influx of skilled labour starts and puts downward pressure on wages, I can't see an end to the spiral.
Absolutely, that is why the report said a change to the CGT and negative gearing would cause a fiscal shock.And asset owners/capital win either way.
well governments ( normally ) want a 'strong economy ' ( no matter how fake it is ) to help their reelection chances now that is partly the fault of the voter who prefer politicians over statesmen .Add to that the Sydney/Melbourne ponzi is kicking off again, so have the rise in interest rates changed much? Well probably at the bottom of the pecking order it has made life much more difficult, but where the Govt wanted to dampen demand it has just kept on keeping on.
Meanwhile the RBA soldiers on with trying to keep a lid on inflation, when 50% of the population live in the ponzi scheme area and everyone wants to get on board. Sooner or later the bubble has to be popped, the longer it is left the bigger it gets.
This is the main issue, that no one wants to address and the answer is buried deep in the article, where it is lost:
Treasury tax statements in 2019-2020 found three-quarters of the tax deductions claimed using negative gearing went to the top 10 per cent of earners.Phasing out property tax breaks could save $74b but it also could create 'significant economic shock'
The Parliamentary Budget Office warns phasing out property tax breaks may "trigger a significant economic shock". That's why next week's budget is more focused on increasing the supply of housing rather than trying to make housing affordable by reducing house prices.www.abc.net.au
While that may be the case, the PBO warns that changing the status quo could see some property owners "pushed into negative equity, making it detrimental to sell the property and, potentially, creating risks for the banking system, possibly leading to more defaults".
"A sudden decline in house prices, and higher rents, may also trigger a significant economic shock, and resulting negative fiscal consequences, partly or fully offsetting the additional revenue. For example, lower-than-anticipated capital gains and corresponding tax," the PBO says.
"If the price of the investment property has grown more than twice as fast as CPI over the period of ownership, as has likely been the case over the past few years, then the investor would have a high incentive to sell."
However, Max Chandler-Mather says "the government keeps tinkering around the edges" on housing policy and, over time, the budgetary impact will be beneficial.
"If we do not tackle the scourge of massive tax concessions for property investors — negative gearing, capital gains tax — then we are going to see another generation of people locked out of buying their first home," he says.
"I think what the government needs to realise is that they're here to represent every Australian, not just those who currently make billions of dollars off the property system."
That wont happen and if it did a bipartisan push would happen for a republic, the two party system is ingrained and it bumps along from pillar to post, first labor get in and instigate change then the coalition get in and pay for it.unless you start voting for independents and minor parties the voter will never be better than 4th in a pollie's priorities ( self and family No. 1 , to the party No. 2 , the large donors No. 3 , and whoever can sort it out themselves ) and worse is coming as the big players devolve into a 'uni-party '
what if .. the welfare goes away , or at best becomes the minimal safety net it used to be ( except for the select few ' gold cards ' )That wont happen and if it did a bipartisan push would happen for a republic, the two party system is ingrained and it bumps along from pillar to post, first labor get in and instigate change then the coalition get in and pay for it.
Then rinse wash repeat.
The big problem is we have a very generous welfare system and we have a very high standard of living, which means both issues cost a lot.
We have to have high taxes too pay for the welfare and we have to have high wages, to be able to take the taxes to pay the welfare.
Not a great situation as the world becomes more overpopulated, poverty is rising and resources are diminishing.
Something has got to change, I don't know what it is, but I'm sure in the near future something will.
0% probabilitywhat if .. the welfare goes away
No welfare cheques for the beach and couch bums. Then the peasants would revolt. Just imagine rent-a-rabble marching down the street to Parliament House. Would be a new experience for them.0% probability
Or the politicians, bureaucrats etc getting a real job and doing an honest day's work.No welfare cheques for the beach and couch bums. Then the peasants would revolt. Just imagine rent-a-rabble marching down the street to Parliament House. Would be a new experience for them.
I have a thing about being over taxed. Kerry Packer was the manOr the politicians, bureaucrats etc getting a real job and doing an honest day's work.
"They're not spending it so well that we should be donating extra".
TBH it's not really the paying of taxes I have an issue with, it's the squandering of them.I have a thing about being over taxed. Kerry Packer was the man
we are in 'uncharted territory ' the impossible suddenly becomes thinkable , sure society might explode into a civil war , or rampant crime ,.. but when 'the carrot ' keeps on being tied the increasingly longer sticks , one must consider the outcome0% probability
that would certainly test the loyalty of the SAS ( back the pollies , or their families and mates )No welfare cheques for the beach and couch bums. Then the peasants would revolt. Just imagine rent-a-rabble marching down the street to Parliament House. Would be a new experience for them.
Thing is trawler, going after housing (taxing it) would get you crucified at the next election.Absolutely, that is why the report said a change to the CGT and negative gearing would cause a fiscal shock.
The reality is, the sooner the better, the longer it is left, the further the distortion becomes.
At the moment the shock would be centered around the Sydney/ Melbourne property market, now what is happening those people are using their equity to start and bid up property in outer areas and so it moves on.
Just dumb policy and it is a bit like when Abbott won office, he said I will call another election if I don't get a clear majority, he won without a clear majority he didn't call a new election and put forward contentious policy and it cost him his job.
The same will happen with Albo IMO, he doesn't want to blow up the ponzi, but not doing so will blow him up IMO.
I can see it now, immigration up 100%, Sydney house prices up 50%, that hopefully doesn't happen, but Lowe can only do so much with one trigger.
taxing housing ( a defacto inheritance tax ) would also crush any incentive to buy a home ( for most people/families ) and there goes one of the few Australian industries left banking/constructionThing is trawler, going after housing (taxing it) would get you crucified at the next election.
Reality is that a housing tax of any kind would effectively be an inheritance tax by proxy at this point - you'd have boomers up in arms saying "I want to leave this behind to my kids and you're going to take it" and you'd have gen Y'ers going "Inheriting this is the only way I'm ever going to get ahead in life" so you'd have both generations wanting your head.
It's political suicide at this point. Ergo, something's gotta give somewhere else, and that something is going to be gen X's income taxes.
With howard & co selling off everything not welded down back in the 90's/early 00's there's simply nothing else left to plunder.
waiting for sh*t to hit the fan , for me , the US was down about 1.5% last time i looked .. about 1.3% now .. will it drop near the end or will the PPT come to the rescueOn an unrelated note, what the hell are you lot doing up at 2-4am? This is normally my witching hour of sh!tposts.
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?