Non Footy Chat Thread II

[Gary Gutful]

Can I have a Big Wac, Wcnuggets and a Quarter Wounder?

 

[Dibs]

Can I have a Big Wac, Wcnuggets and a Quarter Wounder?

Just get a Whopper FFS

 

[Gary Gutful]

Just get a Whopper FFS

*Mopper

 

[Gronk]

Whether you agree with Labor's rollback of negative gearing or not, this is certainly food for thought.

 

[84 Baby]

Whether you agree with Labor's rollback of negative gearing or not, this is certainly food for thought.

Depends. How many were in a loss position? And how were they all funding living?
Tax on that income is being paid somewhere

 

[Gronk]

Ping @strider . WTF. Do all people that live in your area mince about like this when they get home from work ?

https://m.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-padstow-130990534

 

[strider]

Ping @strider . WTF. Do all people that live in your area mince about like this when they get home from work ?

https://m.realestate.com.au/property-house-nsw-padstow-130990534

FFS I dont live in padstow .... thats where the peasants live

That peasant clearly has a marble fetish .... probably drug money

 

[hindy111]

FFS I dont live in padstow .... thats where the peasants live

That peasant clearly has a marble fetish .... probably drug money

Mick lives in Padstow

 

[strider]

Mick lives in Padstow

makes sense

 

[TheRam]

Just throwing this out there. Thoughts?

Loved it, but saddened that we are losing those beautiful true original Aussie ascents. We spoke so much better then I think.

 

[TheRam]

Whether you agree with Labor's rollback of negative gearing or not, this is certainly food for thought.

Negative gearing should not exist for investment anything. It should only exist for the home owner and that is it. And I say this as a landlord of investment property. Why should investors get a leg up on the tax payers coin to speculate on his or her investment. It only encourages long term inflationary trends. Just like we see today where the average punter who unfortunately for them comes along a few decades later to become renters for all their lives unable to afford to buy their own home. Now that is an artificial market catering for the wealthy to the detriment of the poor.


But it should be removed fairly and not retrospectively. Government should not be hurting its citizens with laws but improving our lives. So just stop negative gearing from a given date but allow all previous investment owners to pay off their loans still using it. Once the loan has been squared, then no more negative gearing. Done.

 

[Gronk]

Negative gearing should not exist for investment anything. It should only exist for the home owner and that is it. And I say this as a landlord of investment property. Why should investors get a leg up on the tax payers coin to speculate on his or her investment. It only encourages long term inflationary trends. Just like we see today where the average punter who unfortunately for them comes along a few decades later to become renters for all their lives unable to afford to buy their own home. Now that is an artificial market catering for the wealthy to the detriment of the poor.


But it should be removed fairly and not retrospectively. Government should not be hurting its citizens with laws but improving our lives. So just stop negative gearing from a given date but allow all previous investment owners to pay off their loans still using it. Once the loan has been squared, then no more negative gearing. Done.

Yes Labor have stated that the rollback will be grandfathered. So all existing tax structures will be honoured.

 

[strider]

I agree entirely with labors claim that investors shouldnt negative gear multiple properties.

BUT disagree with their approach ... which is to allow it on new developments only.

I think everyone should be allowed to negative gear just 1 property, old or new .... i think there are benefits to having property investment but agree it should not be oriented towards rich merkins having a heap of properties.

 

[Gronk]

I agree entirely with labors claim that investors shouldnt negative gear multiple properties.

BUT disagree with their approach ... which is to allow it on new developments only.

I think everyone should be allowed to negative gear just 1 property, old or new .... i think there are benefits to having property investment but agree it should not be oriented towards rich merkins having a heap of properties.

Agree. The NSW government have a threshold for Land Tax. Meaning that those who have multiple investments are exposed to 1.6% when the combined land values exceed $692,000. There is even a premium property land tax which slugs you even more when land values top $4.2m.

These disincentives are good and help housing affordability*.

* ATO needs to stop allowing Land Tax to be tax deductible.

 

[strider]

I believe forcing negative gearing to new properties only will likely be a bad outcome for those on low incomes renting .... an older property == cheaper rent. If there are less around then it will become harder to get cheaper rent.

 

[Gronk]

I believe forcing negative gearing to new properties only will likely be a bad outcome for those on low incomes renting .... an older property == cheaper rent. If there are less around then it will become harder to get cheaper rent.

Yeah I'm in two minds too. Whilst Homer Shorten is after the rich merkins who receive crazy tax benefits out of negative gearing, I know for a fact that the only way that some kids can get into the market is to buy a house/unit in bumf**knowhere and rent it out. Taking that option away from them will make it even harder to buy their first home.

 

[hindy111]

Yeah I'm in two minds too. Whilst Homer Shorten is after the rich merkins who receive crazy tax benefits out of negative gearing, I know for a fact that the only way that some kids can get into the market is to buy a house/unit in bumf**knowhere and rent it out. Taking that option away from them will make it even harder to buy their first home.

It may hurt the rich a little but it would hurt the poor even more.

 

[Gronk]

It may hurt the rich a little but it would hurt the poor even more.

Homer still needs to get it through the senate. They might take on-board @strider 's advice to exempt the first investment property or maybe even excempt first home buyers.

 

[Eelogical]

Loved it, but saddened that we are losing those beautiful true original Aussie ascents. We spoke so much better then I think.

Martin Place, 1979. Sometimes, the more things change the more they stay the same. Accents were still fine back then........topic aside.

 

[strider]

Homer still needs to get it through the senate. They might take on-board @strider 's advice to exempt the first investment property or maybe even excempt first home buyers.

he should sign me up as his advisor