This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.
Correct, the problem is so big that for most people there is literally no way to think, manoeuvre, or otherwise get around it.
If you are in the situation of not enough income, crazy prices, there are still options:
Move: jobs, country,regional etc.
Buy 3 Bedrooms, sublease 2
After all , sublease are very high too.


Or just buy an ip if you really really want to get in the re market.
Carry on letting, currently landlords are subsidising renters enjoy it.
And enjoy the fact that if the market collapses, you will have capital losses to claim..better that the suckers with ppor...
 
Landlords and taxpayers are subsidising renters. Lol
Jump on the ponzi.
 
The thing is that NG is there for everyone to use, it's like the CGT discount, it's voluntary to use the discount rate after a year or would you rather pay the full rate for the sake of paying more tax?

All these people holding money in the bank, getting eaten up by yearly inflation, are better off taking a loan out for an empty block of land or a cheap flat, as they tend to beat inflation and at least with the flat they can make use of negative gearing. Once they have equity built up they can sell and buy into their own home.
 
Therein lies the problem.
No money left for nation building, all locked up in the ponzi.
 
Therein lies the problem.
No money left for nation building, all locked up in the ponzi.
You know we're a country of wasted wealth, the govt could have skimmed resources but hey everyone wants to live it up with holidays to Bali and buy new cars every 5 years.

A roof over your head is still better than paying for someone's investment through high rents. No govt is going to help you I've found, you have to help yourself. I'd live in a tin shed if I had to.
 
I agree, my first house, was chopped in half, carried on trucks 200km and re stumped. Lol

It didn't come with a bathroom and had a big hole in the middle, where the lounge fire and kitchen stove once were, they didn't transport the brick bits. I had a wife and three kids, that had to manage, while I made it livable, around working full time.

But I was only 27 at the time, so I had youth on my side.
 
but that was how SOME boomers/ and older afforded to buy the house ( not still be in a mortgage/reverse mortgage )

the house fairy did NOT come by and give them some title deeds ( although the Housing Commission DID let the current tenants buy the property they were renting a couple of decades back , at a reasonable price )
 
but they ( the various governments ) DID skim , it is called royalties , add on various taxes fees , charges , and demands mines put in extra infrastructure ( outside of the mine lease )

it just wasn't spent wisely
 
Landlords and taxpayers are subsidising renters. Lol
Jump on the ponzi.
some investors still love negative gearing ( as temporary as that may be )

not all property investors own the land/building unencumbered , and that includes most REITs ( they typically run at 30% to 40% revolving debt )

not the way i do things but plenty of 'smart money ' does
 
but they ( the various governments ) DID skim , it is called royalties , add on various taxes fees , charges , and demands mines put in extra infrastructure ( outside of the mine lease )

it just wasn't spent wisely
Companies like Santos barely paid any tax for a few years, and they made income in the billions.
 
And franking credits? You voted against NG removal….eh?
Yes, as long as it is the same for everyone, as opposed to last time where the poor and smsf were going to lose them but industry funds and billionaires were goung to keep them.
Just remove them from everyone and I wont have a problem with it.
Unfortunately the elite left wlnt have a bar of that. Lol
Gina and Twiggy probably get as much franking credit, as all the mums and dads that bought the original Telstra float, put together.
But that's fine, take it off the poor and give to the rich, in typical left wing hypocrysy.
No wonder Labor voter base is the rich elites, Bill and Albo learnt their lesson with that one, the majority don't have the underlying nasty streak some politicians have.
 
From a landlords perspective yes, negative gearing basically is taxpayers giving landlords a cheaper housing loan, from what I understand.
Basically, a renter does not cover the cost of what they lease, so it is subsidized
Neg gearing still cost the property owner but is offset partly by less taxes..
It is debatable considering "less taxes" as a gift from the government ..is the government gifting us the fact taxes are not 100%?
But yes, the owner loses money, the ATO gets a bit less and the renter complains
Just facts..after, is RE pricing crazy..yes
But as our Australian pesos heads to 50c USD, less now that a couple of years ago...
We are all becoming poorer, and RE not falling at the same rate
Post covid border closure, 1aud was 74c USD, RE at the top
we are now at 63c and it was lower a few weeks ago.and inflation was in double digit lately
Australian RE has not increased to compensate: Australian RE real prices is falling but our incomes are just falling harder..but WA reelected labour, ndis is still scamming, we are still closing coal power plant and still adding PS and their obvious legacy: regulations, fees and costs
 
franking credits?
A very different issue.

Arguing about the rate of tax applied to income is one thing but to not provide credit for tax paid during the course of the financial year, thus requiring it to be paid a second time, would be quite something else. Doubly so if only applied to a portion of the population and even more so if applied only to those with lower incomes.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...