Society/Culture Landlords - What is the point?

[faible]

I don't disagree with his points, I'm just pointing out his allusion that property investors owning 253 homes is some sort of widespread norm is ludicrous and obviously aimed at property investors

No one? We're literally talking about that purple ph*qwit alluding exactly that. Many more like him and no doubt there are many in this thread who share the same ill directed anger.

No sh*t, but because I'm an investor I'm that anti christ right? Purple w*nker certainly seems to think I own 253 properties just to 'punch down' for amusement.

No one ever, EVER has felt sympathy for a landlord, nor should they.

Yet w*nkers like purple who have an axe to grind are targeting in the wrong direction.

Play the ball not the person.

Seems to me like you've misread what he's said. You've taken it as a personal attack. He's very explicitly talking about the system and how it benefits landlords but not renters, and how the 'mum and dad investor' trope is used as a shield for criticism of the wealthy who maximise their benefits from the system at the expense of renters.

The idea of a mum and dad property investor is something that was constructed to make you feel empathy towards a landlord that may own 253 investment properties.

Just because you’ve reproduced, that doesn’t mean you should have additional protections when it comes to property investment, especially when you are the ones who have options and concessions (such as selling your investment properties, negative gearing, capital gains tax exemptions) compared to a renter who has no choice when it comes to needing housing.

And he's right, why on earth should renters feel empathy for landlords in a system that involves renters forking out cash for a necessity, while landlords are the ones that get all the protections and benefits?

 

[kickazz]

Play the ball not the person.

Class warfare is, always has and always will be, a combat sport.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Seems to me like you've misread what he's said. You've taken it as a personal attack.

No I haven't

He's very explicitly talking about the system and how it benefits landlords but not renters, and how the 'mum and dad investor' trope is used as a shield for criticism of the wealthy who maximise their benefits from the system at the expense of renters.

Then don't allude that investors with 253 properties that are just investing for the purposes of punching down on others for the fun of it is the norm.

And he's right, why on earth should renters feel empathy for landlords

Like I said earlier, no one ever has empathized / sympathized with landlords, EVER, and nor should they.

Nor should landlords be portrayed as some sort of anti christ, like some on here and that purple ph*qhead do.

Sure, there probably are greedy aholes that are investors, just like in any other sphere of life, but you know and I know it's not the norm like some would like it to be just so they can grind their axe.

More than a few on the boards of BF who are just pessimistic aholes who wanna find offence and pick a fight, some of our mods are certainly glaring examples of this.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

1

Relax. You're only a small part of the problem.

 

[faible]

No I haven't

Then don't allude that investors with 253 properties that are just investing for the purposes of punching down on others for the fun of it is the norm.

Like I said earlier, no one ever has empathized / sympathized with landlords, EVER, and nor should they.

Nor should landlords be portrayed as some sort of anti christ, like some on here and that purple ph*qhead do.

Sure, there probably are greedy aholes that are investors, just like in any other sphere of life, but you know and I know it's not the norm like some would like it to be just so they can grind their axe.

More than a few on the boards of BF who are just pessimistic aholes who wanna find offence and pick a fight, some of our mods are certainly glaring examples of this.

A few of us have tried, but you seem determined to completely misunderstand what he's doing and what he's all about.

The idea that mum and dad investors is the norm, and we should be kind to our landlords is exactly the thing he's trying to illustrate. It's not, and renters shouldn't.

The system is setup so that the wealthy can milk every possible advantage they can from it, all whilst the tenants pay.

You getting your back up and being personally offended is a positive, maybe you'll think about some of the stuff he has to say next time you're asking for a rent increase or at the voting booth. He's doing great work for renters that are bearing the brunt of cost of living pressure. No one else is.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Relax. You're only a small part of the problem.

I'm part of the problem by tryna better my own position.

That makes the anti christ for some on here, oh and apparently I deserve that reputation.

Yeah nah, those that have that opinion can GAGF as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

I'm part of the problem by tryna better my own position.

That makes the anti christ for some on here, oh and apparently I deserve that reputation.

Yeah nah, those that have that opinion can GAGF as far as I'm concerned.

Investing in commercial or industrial real estate would be more ethical.

 

[faible]

I'm part of the problem by tryna better my own position.

That makes the anti christ for some on here, oh and apparently I deserve that reputation.

Yeah nah, those that have that opinion can GAGF as far as I'm concerned.

You're benefitting from an unfair system.

You can recognise that and be trying to 'better your own position' simultaneously.

 

[Gralin]

every landlord is trying to better their own position

 

[Johnny Bananas]

Are those numbers legit?

He hasn't provided a source, but taking a quick look at ABS data on new financing commitments for investors, the figure is in the ballpark of the sum of figures for the purchase of existing dwellings, purchase of newly constructed dwellings and purchase of residential land in the 12 months to March 2024. However, this only applies to those who buy with financing, and I would imagine there are a few investors who can afford to buy without the need for financing, so perhaps he's received figures that aren't yet publicly available, that incorporate investment purchases without financing also.

 

[Carringbush2010]

A few of us have tried, but you seem determined to completely misunderstand what he's doing and what he's all about.

You thinking I'm deliberately misunderstanding says all we need to know.

As I've pointed out, several times, I completely understand where he's coming from.

What you're not understanding which is very strange considering I've explained several times, is his clear allusion, in that post, that ALL investors are greedy aholes.

Unwarranted allusion

The idea that mum and dad investors is the norm, and we should be kind to our landlords is exactly the thing he's trying to illustrate. It's not, and renters shouldn't.

You're being highly naive if you believe that the rich and greedy are run of the mill property investors.

I'm certainly not, and I certainly don't know anyone who is.

Yes they do exist, but the overwhelming majority have 1 investment property, who are probably mums and dads.

The system is setup so that the wealthy can milk every possible advantage they can from it, all whilst the tenants pay.

You don't need to explain this to me, as I have already stated and you've ignored I do not disagree the system is very damaging for those that cannot obtain properties.

maybe you'll think about some of the stuff he has to say next time you're asking for a rent increase or at the voting booth

How many times do I have to explain I don't disagree with some of his points? Are you going to continue with your misguided belief I don't recognize this? Are going to continually be ignorant of this?

EDIT; I can't just raise the rent on a whim, there are rules and timelines for raising the rent.

So this notion that landlords just raise rents whenever they want is incorrect.

 

[Carringbush2010]

every landlord is trying to better their own position

HOW DARE THEY????!!!!!!!!!

 

[faible]

You thinking I'm deliberately misunderstanding says all we need to know.

As I've pointed out, several times, I completely understand where he's coming from.

What you're not understanding which is very strange considering I've explained several times, is his clear allusion, in that post, that ALL investors are greedy aholes.

Unwarranted allusion

You're being highly naive if you believe that the rich and greedy are run of the mill property investors.

I'm certainly not, and I certainly don't know anyone who is.

Yes they do exist, but the overwhelming majority have 1 investment property, who are probably mums and dads.

You don't need to explain this to me, as I have already stated and you've ignored I do not disagree the system is very damaging for those that cannot obtain properties.

How many times do I have to explain I don't disagree with some of his points? Are you going to continue with your misguided belief I don't recognize this? Are going to continually be ignorant of this?

All investors are greedy.

It's fine though, most of us are greedy pricks so you've got plenty of company.

Even the statement 'getting ahead' implies someone else falling behind.

For someone who said they know nothing about purplepingers you seem to be making a lot of judgements about his comments based on one tweet.

Rich is a pretty relative statement, if you can afford to own your primary residence and an investment property, that makes you 'rich' compared to most Australians let alone on a global scale.

No, you might not be as rich as some others, but when you're talking about renters (mostly younger people) getting screwed by shit landlords, which is pingers original 'thing', you're talking a pretty low bar for 'rich' from their perspective.

 

[Gralin]

HOW DARE THEY????!!!!!!!!!

It's an absolutely nothing justification

 

[Carringbush2010]

Investing in commercial or industrial real estate would be more ethical.

Not sure I could afford a commercial or industrial property, not sure what they're worth.

 

[faible]

Not sure I could afford a commercial or industrial property, not sure what they're worth.

Depends how big or small you want to go. Plenty for under a million.

Commercial Real Estate & Property For Sale in Australia

Discover 6300 commercial properties for sale in Australia. Find commercial real estate with realcommercial.com.au today.

www.realcommercial.com.au

 

[Carringbush2010]

All investors are greedy.

Trying to better one's financial position is not automatically 'greed'. This says a lot about who I'm conversing with.

It's fine though, most of us are greedy pricks so you've got plenty of company.

Speak for yourself.

Even the statement 'getting ahead' implies someone else falling behind.

Welcome to life, life is competitive, there'll always be some who do better, sometimes unwarranted, sometimes warranted.

To suggest that all property investors are greedy aholes, just coz they're able to invest, is naive and quite frankly offensive

Rich is a pretty relative statement, if you can afford to own your primary residence and an investment property, that makes you 'rich' compared to most Australians let alone on a global scale.

I don't own either, I still have to pay mortgages among all the other expenses, which the rent does not cover.

It's a fair assumption the overwhelming majority of property investors are in the same boat.

Yours and the many others beef is with the few and the system, not the majority.

No, you might not be as rich as some others, but when you're talking about renters (mostly younger people) getting screwed by shit landlords, which is pingers original 'thing', you're talking a pretty low bar for 'rich' from their perspective.

I'm not at all 'rich', ok I'm not working poverty like some, the issue I have is that purely because I'm not scraping on my ass I'm labelled or seen to be some sort of anti christ.

Those that hold that view can GAGF, I'm not an ahole, I'm a decent person who is using property investment as a tool to better my life. How dare I?!

For those that don't like it, sorry, not sorry.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Depends how big or small you want to go. Plenty for under a million.

Commercial Real Estate & Property For Sale in Australia

Discover 6300 commercial properties for sale in Australia. Find commercial real estate with realcommercial.com.au today.

www.realcommercial.com.au

Under a million?

I wouldn't qualify for anything over 400K.

My first property was 368K, the property I live in and still mortgage on was 290K, I barely qualified for those

In fact out of 3 dozen lenders, only one, one would refinance, through a broker.

Are you alluding I could just waltz in and buy up commercial property? Just coz it's more 'ethical'?

Edit: most of those don't have prices.

Here's some that do have prices, out of reach for me.

Commercial Investment Properties in Perth - Greater Region, WA

Search from 10 commercial investment properties in Perth - Greater Region, WA. Find out about Perth - Greater Region, WA's commercial properties prices, tenancy, net income & yield at realcommercial.com.au.

www.realcommercial.com.au

 

[faible]

Trying to better one's financial position is not automatically 'greed'. This says a lot about who I'm conversing with.

Speak for yourself.

Welcome to life, life is competitive, there'll always be some who do better, sometimes unwarranted, sometimes warranted.

To suggest that all property investors are greedy aholes, just coz they're able to invest, is naive and quite frankly offensive

I don't own either, I still have to pay mortgages among all the other expenses, which the rent does not cover.

It's a fair assumption the overwhelming majority of property investors are in the same boat.

Yours and the many others beef is with the few and the system, not the majority.

I'm not at all 'rich', ok I'm not working poverty like some, the issue I have is that purely because I'm not scraping on my ass I'm labelled or seen to be some sort of anti christ.

Those that hold that view can GAGF, I'm not an ahole, I'm a decent person who is using property investment as a tool to better my life. How dare I?!

For those that don't like it, sorry, not sorry.

See, again, you're taking it personally. I never said you were an arseh*le.

'Life is competitive'.
'For those who don't like it, sorry, not sorry'.

You're taking issue with pingers pointing out that 'mum and dad investors' are used as a shield for the system to be left as-is by those in power (who own more than 2 properties on average) and those with wealth in order to avoid fixing a system that's tilted against renters in every way possible.

And you're also saying you have sufficient money to;

• Pay for your mortgage on your PPOR.
• Pay for your mortgage on your investment property.
• And you're not working poverty so presumably you can afford to pay all your bills, put food on the table and such.

That's rich to a lot of people. I'm sure you work hard, have made sacrifices and made more good choices than bad with your money over the stretch. You're also benefitting from a system that incentivises you investing in residential property, and your investment is being subsidised by your tenant (who doesn't receive any tax breaks).

It's a bad system, one that is almost certainly going to show a drastic generational divide as home ownership becomes further and further out of reach. I have a beef with the system because it's a bad one and renters and young people are disproportionately ****ed over by it. Which long-term is going to result in more and more social problems we (the taxpayer) has to deal with.

 

[faible]

Under a million?

I wouldn't qualify for anything over 400K.

My first property was 368K, the property I live in and still mortgage on was 290K, I barely qualified for those

In fact out of 3 dozen lenders, only one, one would refinance, through a broker.

Are you alluding I could just waltz in and buy up commercial property? Just coz it's more 'ethical'?

Edit: most of those don't have prices.

Here's some that do have prices, out of reach for me.

Commercial Investment Properties in Perth - Greater Region, WA

Search from 10 commercial investment properties in Perth - Greater Region, WA. Find out about Perth - Greater Region, WA's commercial properties prices, tenancy, net income & yield at realcommercial.com.au.

www.realcommercial.com.au

I picked a million as a random cutoff point, here's one for $45k.

Sold Office at 1019/1 Queens Road, Melbourne, VIC 3000 - realcommercial

[Offices] 1019/1 Queens Road, Melbourne, VIC 3000. Excellent entry level office to suit any budget. View this property on realcommercial.com.au

www.realcommercial.com.au

Commercial loans function differently, a large portion of that is based on the value of the lease. If you're genuinely interested these guys have a book or podcast you can read or listen to find out more.

Rethink Investing | Australia’s Largest Buyer’s Agency for Commercial Properties

Rethink Investing is Australia’s trusted buyer’s agency, specializing in high cash-flow commercial properties and strategic advice for investors. Our expert-driven solutions span property investment, commercial education, and legal services, ensuring long-term success in real estate.

www.rethinkinvesting.com.au

It's not as inaccessible as most people assume it is.

 

[yodellinhank]

See, again, you're taking it personally. I never said you were an arseh*le.

'Life is competitive'.
'For those who don't like it, sorry, not sorry'.

You're taking issue with pingers pointing out that 'mum and dad investors' are used as a shield for the system to be left as-is by those in power (who own more than 2 properties on average) and those with wealth in order to avoid fixing a system that's tilted against renters in every way possible.

But then the changes propsed seem to be changes that would impact the Mum and Dad investors and have no impact the uber rich, or even benefit them by virtue of removing competition from the market.

And you're also saying you have sufficient money to;

• Pay for your mortgage on your PPOR.
• Pay for your mortgage on your investment property.
• And you're not working poverty so presumably you can afford to pay all your bills, put food on the table and such.

That's rich to a lot of people. I'm sure you work hard, have made sacrifices and made more good choices than bad with your money over the stretch. You're also benefitting from a system that incentivises you investing in residential property, and your investment is being subsidised by your tenant (who doesn't receive any tax breaks).

It's a bad system, one that is almost certainly going to show a drastic generational divided as home ownership becomes further and further out of reach. I have a beef with the system because it's a bad one and renters and young people are disproportionately ****ed over by it. Which long-term is going to result in more and more social problems we (the taxpayer) has to deal with.

You said earlier this kind of thing was risk free, and it isn't. The tenant pays a rent, usually fixed for a term and there are rules around how much it can be inreased and when. The landlord is the one at the mercy of the markets, especially a landlord carrying a debt (the negative gearers everyone loves to rally against). The landlord is the one who has to immediately come up with the scratch when the heating fails or the hot water shits itself etc

The idea people are paying off other people's mortgages doesn't pass muster. If that were the case, just pay your own damn mortgage.

 

[Carringbush2010]

See, again, you're taking it personally. I never said you were an ********.

I never said you said.

You're taking issue with pingers pointing out that 'mum and dad investors' are used as a shield for the system to be left as-is by those in power (who own more than 2 properties on average) and those with wealth in order to avoid fixing a system that's tilted against renters in every way possible.

Wrong again, it's like I'm talking to a brick wall.

I've clearly more than once, have stated I take issue with pingers allusion that property investors with 253 properties is some sort of norm and property investors by and large are bad faith pricks.

• Pay for your mortgage on your PPOR.
• Pay for your mortgage on your investment property.
• And you're not working poverty so presumably you can afford to pay all your bills, put food on the table and such.

Yes and that to some equates to be some bad faith ahole, clearly your hero pinger would view me this way.

You'd be naive to think differently.

That's rich to a lot of people. I'm sure you work hard, have made sacrifices and made more good choices than bad with your money over the stretch. You're also benefitting from a system that incentivises you investing in residential property, and your investment is being subsidised by your tenant (who doesn't receive any tax breaks).

And it's not rich at all, so anyone not scraping on their ass is rich by this logic.

Which is just stupidity at its highest.

Yes how dare I?!

Do I need to explain again, that rent does not cover the mortgage, let alone the other expenses?

I'm in negative territory, negative gearing is not a win, it's much better to be in positive territory. >always<.

The narrative that ng is some sort of god send is preposterous.

Ok ng should probably be scrapped and is a cause of the housing crisis, and would improve supply by the fact the housing investment would by and large involve owner occupier housing and very much less so rental properties.

It's a bad system, one that is almost certainly going to show a drastic generational divided as home ownership becomes further and further out of reach. I have a beef with the system because it's a bad one and renters and young people are disproportionately ****ed over by it. Which long-term is going to result in more and more social problems we (the taxpayer) has to deal with.

How many times do I have to explain I don't disagree with this notion?

 

[Kram]

The idea that you should be able to buy a house, risk-free, with a tenant paying it off, then freely walk away with the capital gain (at a discount if you use the system well) whilst being able to tax-deduct your tenant subsidised mortgage payments, when the tenant (you know, the one actually paying you money) can't tax deduct those payments, doesn't seem a little like a bad system to you?

If you think that buying an investment property and being a landlord is 'risk free' then you are being extremely ignorant.

 

[Carringbush2010]

I picked a million as a random cutoff point, here's one for $45k.

Sold Office at 1019/1 Queens Road, Melbourne, VIC 3000 - realcommercial

[Offices] 1019/1 Queens Road, Melbourne, VIC 3000. Excellent entry level office to suit any budget. View this property on realcommercial.com.au

www.realcommercial.com.au

Commercial loans function differently, a large portion of that is based on the value of the lease. If you're genuinely interested these guys have a book or podcast you can read or listen to find out more.

Rethink Investing | Australia’s Largest Buyer’s Agency for Commercial Properties

Rethink Investing is Australia’s trusted buyer’s agency, specializing in high cash-flow commercial properties and strategic advice for investors. Our expert-driven solutions span property investment, commercial education, and legal services, ensuring long-term success in real estate.

www.rethinkinvesting.com.au

It's not as inaccessible as most people assume it is.

Thanks faible:

I might have a look at that some time in the future. Not sure I'd qualify for though.

I doubt that 45k commercial properties are the norm. The link I posted, those properties are certainly out of reach for mum and dad investors and myself.

 

[faible]

I never said you said.

Wrong again, it's like I'm talking to a brick wall.

I've clearly more than once, have stated I take issue with pingers allusion that property investors with 253 properties is some sort of norm and property investors by and large are bad faith pricks.

Yes and that to some equates to be some bad faith ahole, clearly your hero pinger would view me this way.

You'd be naive to think differently.

And it's not rich at all, so anyone not scraping on their ass is rich by this logic.

Which is just stupidity at its highest.

Yes how dare I?!

Do I need to explain again, that rent does not cover the mortgage, let alone the other expenses?

I'm in negative territory, negative gearing is not a win, it's much better to be in positive territory. >always<.

The narrative that ng is some sort of god send is preposterous.

Ok ng should probably be scrapped and is a cause of the housing crisis, and would improve supply by the fact the housing investment would by and large involve owner occupier housing and very much less so rental properties.



How many times do I have to explain I don't disagree with this notion?

I never said you hadn't said the system needed changing or fixing?

You seem to keep reading things I haven't written.

You're rich compared to a lot of the target market that purplepingers is talking to (young renters). I'm trying to illustrate that 'rich' is a relative term. You say you're not rich, but recognise you're a lot better off than some others. So to those others you would be rich. You're the aspiration to them.

I said the renter subsidises your investment. Some tenancies the renter does more than subsidise it, some they don't. They receive no tax benefits for that - which again, is what purplepingers (his name is Jordan btw) was trying to point out.

You seem to be arguing with me despite agreeing that the system isn't a good system, because you don't like the pingers has said the mum and dad investor trope is used as a cover for those who are investors that own far more than 1 investment property - for example our politicians.