huge shift in Oz society?

[sengjc]

Personally I think all countries would do well to adopt Singapore's system where the Government is required by the Constitution to have a balanced budget over it's term in office. Would put a stop to all the crazy populist policies that allow politicians to bribe their way into getting elected/re-elected.

I like Singapore. You work hard (sometimes too hard) for your money. If you are well-off or are capable, it's a brilliant place to live.

[polarbear]

I can see Australians being forced to retire on mass to cheaper Asian & euro countries

like the Brits!

That's my fathers plan

Even with the investments he currently has in his pocket, if he plans to live past 75 and retire before he's 70 he needs to head to a country where the cost of living is much lower.

He likes to say "I can live like a king in Thailand for $45k a year"

Not sure what his definition of "live like a King" is but it's an interesting point

[Ken Gargett]

That's my fathers plan

Even with the investments he currently has in his pocket, if he plans to live past 75 and retire before he's 70 he needs to head to a country where the cost of living is much lower.

He likes to say "I can live like a king in Thailand for $45k a year"

Not sure what his definition of "live like a King" is but it's an interesting point

have you seen the royal palace in bangkok? good luck!

[dicko]

Correct me if I'm wrong, Dicko - but are you're saying its appropriate to pay tax on profit..... but bad luck on any loss incurred trying to chase profit?

In relation to property investment . I think it's different for say business where you want to encourage investment and entrepreneurialism.

People pay capital gains tax or can have the "benefit" of a cg loss. Having the loss year to year as a deduction on your income tax looks like having your cake and eating it too.

I hear El Prez's call about the wider issues this may cause. Houses and flats would still be built though with the normal demand of homebuyers and people would still invest in property if you take away the negative gearing perks eg. plenty of people have positively geared investment propeties or they can have negative equity and still be paying it off from rent without the tax perk.

my 2c (and very biased as a first home seeker)

[LexG]

Yes it would. I don't see that as a problem. If you can't afford to buy an investment property...don't.

The rules are the rules though and I have no issue with people taking advantage of it. I do think the government should close the loophole though.

I have no idea whether there would be a resulting slump in the market but to be honest that wouldn't be a problem with me (as a younger person looking at buying a property I compete directly as a buyer with people looking to invest in cheaper property).

What scares them Dicko is that some 70+ % of all new unit purchases (currently) are from investors. Remove that (negative gearing) from the equation and we won't see anything of scale built for a decade.

30% GST on Soda drinks/fast food would be a start. 10% GST on all food items that are not Fresh (farm to grocer unprocessed excluding unflavoured milk).

Given what has been going on in Sydney with foreign property investors, my worry is that removing NG would mean less locals can invest in property, which would open up the market to heaps of forgein investment.

There is alot of bias in my view too though, but as a first time property investor rather than buyer