Society/Culture Landlords - What is the point?

[kickazz]

Higher taxes on short stay accommodation, vacancy taxes

Rate changes like Merri-bek are voting on

Or even require short stay accommodation to you know, only be allowed in commercial zones?

 

[Gralin]

Or even require short stay accommodation to you know, only be allowed in commercial zones?

Zoning makes sense for sure

 

[kickazz]

If ever an industry needed "disrupting" by a tech startup it's gotta be the streaming turd that is real estate.

Then again Airbnb is just that but are party of the problem, not the solution

 

[burge13]

If ever an industry needed "disrupting" by a tech startup it's gotta be the streaming turd that is real estate.

These pricks charge an admin fee and a marketing fee and then collect their % commission for the sale.

With how quickly houses are selling atm I'd rage them daring to charge a 'marketing fee'. Ring 3 people in your contact list or random recent calls, one will buy it, get ****ed. They do next to nought for their money

That said, the whole of the country hates them so some kind of karma there. I wonder if REA lie about what they do for work when they meet someone new. Be more socially acceptable to say you're a meth dealer

 

[kickazz]

Am I a shit human if my landlording is limited to the fact I have a super fund that invests in property, or have I successfully leapt through an ethical loophole?

Good question.

I think most super property investment is commercial though, so at least is used for creating wealth? (Then again many businesses too are closing due to high rents, the market seems to be failing here)

It all depends on whether the investment is wealth creating or rent seeking IMO in determining it's ethics.

 

[yodellinhank]

Good question.

I think most super property investment is commercial though, so at least is used for creating wealth? (Then again many businesses too are closing due to high rents, the market seems to be failing here)

It all depends on whether the investment is wealth creating or rent seeking IMO in determining it's ethics.

Many trades people use residential property as self managed super, because they can actually get a tradie to work on it without emptying their bank account.

 

[Taylor]

Many trades people use residential property as self managed super, because they can actually get a tradie to work on it without emptying their bank account.

It's a handy way of laundering cash to other tradespeople to upgrade your investment wealth too.

 

[evolved2]

yes tenants have rights

Was anyone disputing that?

that article was suggesting the tenants were in the wrong though

Yes, because they allegedly stopped paying rent when were given notice to move IIRC. It's quite telling that some of you are unable to even comprehend the possibility that the tenant is in the wrong here. So much copium.

 

[evolved2]

Maybe the ATO/government should "accidentally" fine them then.

Or they could use a computer to come up with a tax debt they think the landlord owes and then have an automated system to notify and follow up on this assumed debt........

That 90% of landlords get their taxes wrong isn't really surprising. I presume the number of renters with income above the tax threshold who get their tax wrong (in their favour) is in the same ballpark if not higher. In my experience, poorer people are more desperate and even more willing to take advantage of others when it suits.

People are dishonest. It's just a fact of life.

 

[Taylor]

Was anyone disputing that?

Yes, because they allegedly stopped paying rent when were given notice to move IIRC. It's quite telling that some of you are unable to even comprehend the possibility that the tenant is in the wrong here. So much copium.

People who own property are rich and rich people deserve to be punished for that by being deprived of value or wealth, especially when someone who is not as wealthy is able to facilitate that.

Tune in next week for my next Ted Talk.

 

[evolved2]

People who own property are rich and rich people deserve to be punished for that by being deprived of value or wealth, especially when someone who is not as wealthy is able to facilitate that.

Tune in next week for my next Ted Talk.

Exactly!

 

[Taylor]

Exactly!

I haaaate rich people*.

*Rich people are those strictly with more wealth than I, from my own perspective and ignoring any social wealth granted by existing within a nation of providing like Australia

 

[Ghost Patrol]

People who own property are rich and rich people deserve to be punished for that by being deprived of value or wealth, especially when someone who is not as wealthy is able to facilitate that.

Tune in next week for my next Ted Talk.

How many investment properties do you have Taylor?

 

[Taylor]

How many investment properties do you have Taylor?

Zero

 

[kickazz]

People who own property are rich and rich people deserve to be punished for that by being deprived of value or wealth, especially when someone who is not as wealthy is able to facilitate that.

Tune in next week for my next Ted Talk.

No one in their right mind wants the rich to be punished for being rich.

Some of us here though think the average taxpayer shouldn't be punished either. Which they are now, by propping up tax concessions for non productive assets.

 

[evolved2]

No one in their right mind wants the rich to be punished for being rich.

Some of us here though think the average taxpayer shouldn't be punished either. Which they are now, by propping up tax concessions for non productive assets.

Tax concessions are available for other assets including shares, superannuation, and currencies - why should they be propped up by the taxpayer, but not property?

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

Tax concessions are available for other assets including shares, superannuation, and currencies - why should they be propped up by the taxpayer, but not property?

Because you can't eat, drink or live in shares so nobody cares when they get priced out of the share market.

 

[Kram]

Tax concessions are available for other assets including shares, superannuation, and currencies - why should they be propped up by the taxpayer, but not property?

Hey Mr property tycoon you leave us honest asx battlers out of this.

 

[evolved2]

Because you can't eat, drink or live in shares so nobody cares when they get priced out of the share market.

Fair enough. Which tax changes do you favour in respect to property investors?

 

[Taylor]

I think that capital gains tax should be entirely removed if you're above fifty five and sell to a first home buyer. There could even be a requirement to send some of the money into your super if people want it to be a bit tighter.

The goal would be to have people who have existing properties but don't want to have to fit hundreds of thousands of dollars onto their current tax year income and being encouraged to sell for cheaper prices to first home buyers.

I think it would cycle some properties into new buyers hands.

 

[kickazz]

Tax concessions are available for other assets including shares, superannuation, and currencies - why should they be propped up by the taxpayer, but not property?

Because they benefit the economy and society by being wealth producing investments.

That goes for for new homes and improved (renovated kitchen, etc) homes too.

Currencies I have to think about.

 

[burge13]

Fair enough. Which tax changes do you favour in respect to property investors?

Cap negative gearing at a certain amount of properties. I'd say 3 but even then you'd have husband and wife with 3 each which people will complain about...

3 helps Mum and Dad investors plan for retirement without being entirely greedy. We need people to sustain themselves in retirement to get out from the rising aged pension costs so it's not a bad thing

There needs to be a rental market as so few people have deposits so can't scrap all incentive for investors as much as people seem to want to.

Zone negative gearing and all concessions too. $2m coastal holiday homes should be taxed differently to a 2bd unit near the CBD

Needs to be something legislated against developers hoarding land and only trickling it out bit by bit to maximise profits but when we don't have enough builders it's a moot point. The government isn't prioritising builders on their skilled migration list either so how people are in favour of essentially unskilled (we don't need more yoga teachers or baristas) mass migration I'll never know. Migration also needs to be limited until housing and aged care/hospital beds are sorted. Isn't sustainable atm. Overseas students can study online for a start

 

[Gralin]

Why does having kids make someone worthy of owing multiple investment properties?

 

[kickazz]

Why does having kids make someone worthy of owing multiple investment properties?

Because single people and DINKS are black-hearted, evil monsters?

 

[Taylor]

The only people I know with multiple investment properties have their children living in them, the children are adults and those are the people I am friends with.

You want to encourage more places to be built and more existing places not moving between landlords then put the negative gearing concessions on the new builds for ten to fourteen years, fixed to the property and transferable in sale like a car warranty.