Hi guys,
Well, its election time again. I thought that posting this to you all would be of benefit to all. This site has something like 30,000 members interested in the property market.
My question to you all is who will be the one that will be in our favour – that will look after property investors, Latham or Howard.
Howard predicts that Latham will raise interest rates whereas Latham denies this.
Your opinions please?
I’ve found a way to help you save and earn whilst not selling or delivering any product. If interested, drop me an email or PM me to find out how
The Reserve Bank raises interest rates, and is predicted to do so before Xmas. IR’s will probably be raised no matter who gets in.
I will vote for the party that suits my political perspectives in many ways- my interest in property will not determine my vote.
kay henry
Originally posted by kay henry:I will vote for the party that suits my political perspectives in many ways- my interest in property will not determine my vote.
kay henry
Pleeeeeeeeease
If property was a primary source of income both present and/or the future then exit taxs (like BoB Carrs) ,increases in CG tax, abolishment of NG would have no effect or concern on who youd vote for.
I think the two of them are pretty similar, basically useless…
I think the time has come for the government to support investors instead of flogging them. Property taxes, especially those seen in NSw are completely useless and serve only to fund the Government’s many short comings. I personally don’t think anyone should even run for government unless they have a very sound business record i.e have run a business at a profit.Originally posted by Yorker:unless they have a very sound business record i.e have run a business at a profit.
great suggestion Yorker – I guess if they know how to run a business at a profit, they could run teh country at a profit.
I’ve found a way to help you save and earn whilst not selling or delivering any product. If interested, drop me an email or PM me to find out how
Hey Ted,
Ig CGT was at 50%, then I wouldn’t care- it would simply be taxed the way the rest of earnings is taxed. If negative gearing was abolished, well, it would put property investors on the same level as other workers- no big deal to me. When the exit duty came in, I didn’t have a hissy fit. Check back on my posts at the time, to see if they reflect this- if you can be bothered, which I presume you can’t.
I assume you disagree with my perspective- that’s fine. You’ll vote for the party that protects your property interests, and I’ll vote for the party that works more in line with my other interests in life. It’s ok if you disagree, but I am sincere in my intention of what I said. If a party said they would abolish negative gearing, and spend the extra tax base on public schools and health… well, I would gladly vote for them.
We’re all different, Ted. Just because I am on this Board, doesn’t mean I have to follow some prescribed way of thinking. We have one thing in common- interest in property investing, but it doesn’t determine who I vote for- for me, there’s many more important things to consider in governance.
kay henry
Quote:Originally posted by kay henry:Hey Ted,
Ig CGT was at 50%, then I wouldn’t care- it would simply be taxed the way the rest of earnings is taxed. If negative gearing was abolished, well, it would put property investors on the same level as other workers- no big deal to me.
So for your hard work and diligence in property investing you wouldn’t mind further tax penalties in your quest to get ahead.
When the exit duty came in, I didn’t have a hissy fit. Check back on my posts at the time, to see if they reflect this- if you can be bothered, which I presume you can’t.
I am glad you are happy with it. What about if it was continually raised from 2.25%
I don’t need to check back and see if you had another hissy fit.I assume you disagree with my perspective- that’s fine. You’ll vote for the party that protects your property interests, and I’ll vote for the party that works more in line with my other interests in life. It’s ok if you disagree, but I am sincere in my intention of what I said. If a party said they would abolish negative gearing, and spend the extra tax base on public schools and health… well, I would gladly vote for them.
Well isn’t that the case with the windfall in NSW and Vic with Stamp duty and it still isn’t being spent/managed to provide better schools or hospitals. How much of YOUR money would you like to continue to give on the premise that it is being spent correctly.
We’re all different, Ted. Just because I am on this Board, doesn’t mean I have to follow some prescribed way of thinking. We have one thing in common- interest in property investing, but it doesn’t determine who I vote for- for me, there’s many more important things to consider in governance.
kay henryI agree were all different some more then others
. “Many more important things to consider in governance”[blink]Governance all costs money, the money comes from tax payers (and indirectly from there property investments).If the money isn’t managed properly from this indirect source is that also not important.
So I would vote for the party that can MANAGE what they have been generously given without the need to keep dipping into the taxpayers pocket.
Hey guys, Latham promises Three (count ’em) new books for every newborn baby. Although it’s mandatory that one of them has to be ‘Mien Kempf'(however that’s spelt)
Wallflower,
You’ll find that on the general political scale, it is the Tories, led by Honest John Howard, as the party which espouses the rhetoric within Mein Kampf (spelt correctly).
Mark Latham would prefer little kiddies read something by Trotsky or Karl Marx. No relation to Groucho, Chico, Harpo, Zeppo or Gummo.For those who are unsure of who to vote for come election day, follow these simple instructions:
1. Hang a poster of Howard and another of Latham, next to each other, side by side that is!!!
2. Take a furry object; your aunt’s preloved boa, your uncle’s (shrunk in the wash) toupee, the cat [blink] or basically whatever you can find, and attach a pin to it.
3. Using a blindfold, take the hairy object, spin yourself around until you are facing the direction of the wall with the posters on it (feel around if you have to)…..and finally (here comes the fun bit….) PIN THE TAIL ON OUR NEXT PRIME MINISTER!!!! [medieval]
They’re both a couple of asses, so you can legimately claim, yours was a “donkey” vote!!!! [lmao] [laugh4] [laugh4] [lmao]
Jo
Jeez Jo, i can’t type rolling on the floor laughing, ya got me.[laugh3][laugh3]
I propose Jo runs the next election, howzat ! [bulb]
cheers
thecrestthecrest | Tony Neale - Statewide Motel Brokers
http://www.statewidemotelbrokers.com.au
Email Me | Phone Meselling motels in NSW
Monopoly
I totally agree.
Both the major parties are useless and until the majority of people feel strongly enough (to vote for any other party) we are stuck with the situation as it is and only very slight improvements in our society and our lives will ever come about. I am so sick of hearing the statement that “if I vote for a minor party I am wasting my vote”. By voting for a minor party at least I am trying to change the way things are and not so apathetic that I don’t believe my vote will make any difference or that I vote will be wasted.Wake up and vote for Ethics! Which means not for ALP or Liberal/National.
HousesOnly,
Voting for a minor party is never a wasted vote- of course not, but chances are, unless that candidate gets in, the vote will be preferenced to one of the major parties. There is always a chance too, that the preference will be directed towards the major party that you least want elected, too. The Greens, for example, were preferencing votes away from a local Labor member in my former area, because they didn’t like the way he operated. So a vote for the Greens was a vote for Liberal. Of course, some parties preference noone. Always good to check who the minor parties are preferencing (if they are) before making your vote, I reckon.
kay henry
I have been happy with the way the John Howard has handled the economy and his time in parliament. Better the devil you now I think. Mark Latham is a bit of an unknown in my opinion and from what I can tell he had trouble just running a local council let alone a whole country!
Luke
ChangingPlaces Real Estate.
Save up to 65% on Real Estate commissions.
Email: [email protected] Web: http://www.changingplaces.com.auInteresting comments guys.
In the end thiugh it alwyas seems that we’re in a no-win situation no matter who gets the top job.
They both twist the truth except that Latham is more bold in his views although if he does become PM, he will be crawling back to the US saying he’s sorry for his comments. I guess I just didn’t like how Howard went to war without the approval of the UN.[angry2]
Regards,
George
P.S: I too vote Jo (Monopoly) to become PM. Imagine that – no interest rates for investors – hehehehe…I’ve found a way to help you save and earn whilst not selling or delivering any product. If interested, drop me an email or PM me to find out how
Have to agree with Kay – if all you care about is impact on property investing I think you need some perspective.
Agree with Kay again about our political system -when you can win the primary vote but lose on preferences, you know it’s not a fair system.
Personally I’ll stick with Howard and Cozzie. Labour has a history of being reckless with money, incurring budget deficits, spiking inflation and all the other good things that go along with that.
I agree that if enough people vote for the minor political parties that the major parties (hopefully) will then have to acknowledge there is a high level of dissatisfaction within the voting community.
Just because you give your primary vote to a minor party does not mean that you must then allow them to direct your preferance to the party of their choice. Vote below the line and number all parties in your order of preference. Personally I always put both Labor and Liberal last and second last. I just change their positions according to my thoughts at any given election.
As you can probably guess, I’m not too excited about either of our major political parties. I think this time it just comes down to the fact that the thought of Latham running our country scares me too much to vote Labor.
Regards
SonjaWhilst I cant stand Johnny rotten, The liberals have done a good job overall on the economy……
Latham, sounds good etc, but I just don’t know what he’s really going to do if he gets into power…..
Either way we are screwed, but I think the Libs may be safer for us all…..
I guess the other question is, will Costello make a play for power, and, would he be any better than john howard ??
Intresting comments everyone.
It will be Little Johnny for me again. I am also not happy with the whole Iraq debacle but once again, better the devil you know. Latham is a bit of a joke IMHO. All he does is complain, and do we not already hear enough of that in our day to day lives? Not sure how well he knows his policies either.
Vote #1 for Monopoly!!! [biggrin]
Cheers,
Ali G
Hey Crest, Geo, Ali G
Thanks for your votes guys, but err…I would make a lousy PM; mainly because I like to follow through on my promises, and my tolerance of stupidity is NIL hence I would not get along with many of my fellow (BS)err…colleagues!!!
I just reckon the method I outlined, was a better way of voting. You see, whichever [clown] you end up pinning, at least you can have a bit of fun and “stick it up em” first (so to speak) before they do it to the rest of us!!!![laugh3]
Happy Voting!!!!
Jo
. “Many more important things to consider in governance”[blink]
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. If you don't have an account, you can register here.
