Karl,

you obviously dont know what you're on about.

You are a true believer, as your opening paragraph clearly displays, with your basic foundation being the absurd illusory, abstract notion of a 'right.' Then attaching that sillyness, to housiing.

You dont understand the difference between speculation and investment. If a person holds multiple income producing assets with a view to long term income production and capital growth, that is investment, not speculation. Which is happening when someone goes out on a limb and accumulate multiple rental properties. As oppossed to merely buying, possibly value adding, not producing income and selling an asset for a profit, which is speculation. If thats your concern, you should be pouring your scorn on the schlock mug-cart.

You have no idea the difference between price and value. Nor what drives prices, versus value. The primary driver of price is credit creation and credit availability, both of which have been rampant in the last 10yrs. A device of government in collusion with banking to keep the house of cards going. Raising taxes is just more of the same ponzi scheme. One thing you did get right is that the price doubling of a bit of land in footscray is nothing but a paper shuffle, or more correctly, the paper shuffle of fiat currency credit based ponzi schemes.

In the meantime, there has been no rise in the standard of living or productive capacity of what that deflated fiat money purchases. l think its called inflation. Yet the 'gain' resulting from credit creation is taxed. Which is a very sneaky way of transferring wealth of the people into the gubberments tax coffers. Which would, no doubt, please the likes of you.

Thankfully, for the average home owner, the 'gain' on their house is tax exempt. Small mercy.

So let me see, if in 2000 I'd bought BHP shares instead of land
that only costs, my 8$ investment would be worth 40$ today. Plus
they would have paid me a dividend twice a year, with no land tax
etc. Australia benefits, my dividends are paid here, not to overseas
investors, so our current account benefits.

So my 500k$ would be worth 2.5 million$ and I would be benefitting
from the resources boom. Why on earth would I want to invest
in land that only costs land tax etc?

Anyone can buy a few shares, not just "greedy speculators". But
I know, some prefer to play the pockies etc, or buy the latest plasma
tv, or whatever. Some people can't help themselves. They refuse
to invest in Australia's and their own future, by saving a few
pennies for a rainy day.

If the Govt wants cheaper housing, then don't limit land supply, its
that simple.

Both Howard and Rudd just do not get it.
It is as plain as the nose on our face.
Genuine potential home Owners who want housing or land will be beaten in the rush by speculators. This article proves this point.
The interest rates are still low that doesnot matter to speculators they have property that funds further investments. True Genuine Home Owners are tramled in the rush and are beaten time and time again by those with capital and ready cash supply and demand. Governments have to abolish subsidising the wealthy and provide assistance to those with genuine mortgages on their only home. Subsidise 25% of the interest on the mortgage and reap the negative gearing from the speculators to pay for it.

"Subsidise 25% of the interest on the mortgage and reap the negative gearing from the speculators to pay for it."

Why a subsidy? Perhaps interest on home loans could be made
tax deductable, as long as home owners pay capital gains tax
on their windfall profits, when they sell their houses, rather
the the huge tax free profits made now. We have to pay tax
on all other investment profits, why not on our homes?

Trade215,

The notion of rights is more complex than you give credit to. As a normative standard it is quite plausible to argue for a "right to housing" in an advanced modern society.

I would also beg to differ on the distinction you make between between speculation and investment. An investment in the input of capital in a manner that provides additional goods and services (in addition to a tidy profit to the investor). Speculation consists of appropriating natural resources and withholding them from market-trades; profit is derived through a monopolistic approach, and provides neither additional goods or services in the process. An example which may assist you in this process is to distinguish between the investment of housing, and the speculation of land.

Yabby,

You are quite correct, one of the means to provide cheaper housing is for the government to open up the land supply. However this obviously is limited in both an absolute and relative sense. The application of site rental to the public purse ensures that those who hold land make the most efficient use of it.

Regards,

Lev

Yabby, any gains you might make from selling your own home is hardly "investment profit". It is almost invariably eaten up by the next house you purchase.
And FWIW I agree capital gains taxes are too high, certainly for investments held longer than 5 years. They are certainly part of the reason I've never bothered investing much in the stock market.