"Privileged to things": what does that actually mean?Anyway as I have seen, the more people earn the more people feel they are privileged to things.
"Privileged to things": what does that actually mean?
Hi ROE,
I agree with what you say here, with one small proviso.
Travel is best done when young.
When one is mentally flexible enough to learn about other cultures and other regions.
To broaden one's outlook.
Not just lounge in the sun for Vitamin D uptake.
Take me, I'm 61, like to sleep in my own bed.
Won't travel much anymore!
The 'example' is yet another generalisation. About as meaningless as your original phrase "privileged to things".
I've seen it happen.I was pointing out that some people as income increases (which was mentioned before) still do not set aside more savings to invest as they feel they can spend more.
Sure, but it's not inevitable. Presumably your income has increased over the years, but your own description of your own habits indicates no increasing spending. That would apply to most reasonable people.I've seen it happen.
Had a personal loan and a low rate of pay. Got a pay rise, then a credit card, didn't insure, ended up with a pile of debts and nothing to show for it. I've seen that scenario more than once.
Thank you for your assessment.I'm sure all 15,000+ of your posts have been meaningless.
... Sometimes I think we've allowed the economy to become the master
Passive Income - the secret to long term financial security
Just listen to what politicians say....Sometimes I think we've allowed the economy to become the master
Another thought that has occurred to me is the statement.
It sounds a bit Ponzi to me.
Thus if everyone aspired to passive income, the whole show would collapse, as there would be no active income.
Which I believe is the definition of a Ponzi Scheme.
gg
Just listen to what politicians say....
"Australia is a great economy" or "we live in a modern economy".
Um, no. I thought we lived in a society, with the economy as just part of that. At least that's how it used to be (and in my opinion ought to be now). There's more to society and life than GDP.
Yes, they do love their ever increasing GDP and the ability to brag about "managing" the X.X trillion dollar economy. As if.
Then we have excessively high immigration, adding to GDP yet not to GDP per capita, so what's the point of bringing more people into the country when it causes those already here to suffer ever increasing levels of congestion, massive hikes of utility bills, and well generally a lower quality of life.
Possibly it's a great passive income for our Dear Leaders and those able to extract concessions from the Govt, but for most of us in the great unwashed I really don't see the point. When it's costing us tens of billions of dollars to upgrade the infrastructure to support a bigger population, maybe it's time we had an honest and open look at how big an immigration program we really want.
The infrastructure should have been built instead of the handouts and tax cuts the government did pre GFC. It was always needed even then but the government of the day (which was on its last legs) was more interested in self preservation through buying votes. You can't build an infrastructure strategy after the event. It has to be done well in advance.
With a rapidly ageing population, who is going to support the long term demographic problem Australia and the rest of the developed world are going to face in 20 years time? As current tax payers in their 40s and 50s move into pension phase and no longer pay tax and instead become a net user of government dollars instead of a provider through concessions, the pension and / or use of healthcare (for those who are not self funded, which will be the majority) who is going to help fill this gap? That is what the immigration policy is aimed at doing - increasing the number of people in their 20s to 40s who can become tax payers for the government in the future. Without them, Australia will become a retirement village with no income and aging facilities.
Constant growth on a finite planet can't continue forever. You don't need to be a green to see that, it's obvious to anyone who understands compounding (which ought to be everyone on a financial forum....).no one has spent much time working out how to make an economy work without every increasing population.
OK, here is a great idea for passive income. Buy an unrestricted Sydney Taxi Plate. Cost $400,000 to $430,000 you do not buy or drive the taxi, you buy the plate only. You just lease the plate to a taxi operator, hands off, do nothing and get $550 per week rent for it. The lessee of the plate pays all taxi running costs including, putting a car on the road, radio room, insurance and any other outgoings. $550 p/w income for you, all you need to pay is your own personal tax.
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?