The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > If the world switched to renewables tomorrow!

If the world switched to renewables tomorrow!

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All
Just try to imagine if the world switched to solar, or any other form of renewables, tomorrow.

Sure, there would be a huge infrastructure building period, but once built and implemented, where would the hundreds of thousands of jobs come from that all forms of energy mining both create and generate.

There would be no more prospecting for starters. So geologists would vanish to a large extent along with the crews involved in prospecting.

The manufacturing industry would to a large extent, collapse, as heavy machinery is a major part of this Industry.

The minimg towns and communities would cease to exist and the airlines would suffer greatly as a result, as the FIFO workers would all but vanish.

Road and rail transport systems would suffer huge income and job losses.

Those in the power stations would also loose the majority of their jobs, as the power stations would simply become distributions points, if used at all.

Collectively, the states and counties world wide would loose billions, if not trillions in royalties.

This would place huge strain on our(local) already strained health and education systems, as there would be no income to fill the void left from the loss of royalties.

We have already witnessed to effects of converting a very small percentage of users to solar, in that electricity prices have seen huge increases just to pay for those being subsidized into solar. Of cause, these increases are not all attributed to solar rebates, but the rebates had to come from somewhere.

So, at the end of the day, can we really afford to switch to renewables.
Posted by rehctub, Thursday, 29 November 2012 5:39:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Your proposal is that the switch happens in a flash.

This is not a realistic scenario.

The adoption of new technologies is usually achieved in increments - it evolves. New opportunities ride on the back of new technologies. This makes it difficult to see things that may be gained, and merely makes it easier to see what would be lost.
Posted by Poirot, Thursday, 29 November 2012 6:35:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The overnight switch will not happen, my system is now four years old.
Your exercise is what happened when the wheel was invented.
We will survive, a complete switch will be decades away.
Your emphases on mining is overstated, as each generator shuts down so to will the proportionate coal supply.
Why would manufacture be effected at all, they can make their own renewables as well.
Posted by 579, Thursday, 29 November 2012 6:56:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There'd be massive blackouts.

Cheers,

Tony
Posted by Tony Lavis, Thursday, 29 November 2012 6:58:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
All renewable power supply would still need as much maintenance as coal powered power stations.
The grid, would need still need workers. Wind turbines, thermal power, PV, wave, tide would all still have to be manufactured.
Most of our manufacturing has been exported overseas, so we would have to actually increase our manufacturing ability in a lot of cases.
With peak oil now here, new rail needs to be put in place and with the increase in traffic away from private cars and trucks they would run at a profit.
Mining would still be required for an across the board supply of essentials such as copper, lead, zinc and rare metals. There would still be a need for prospecting.
FI/FO would be a thing of the past as airlines are grounded due to the high cost of fuel if it was available.
The mining towns would become true towns instead of dormitories for FI/FO workers.
It would mean that employment would be redirected to other industries instead of all being involved with quarrying Australia.
The idea that the "normal' consumer, subsidizes installation of PV to rooftop, has been shown to be false.
The main result would be to reduce emissions so that there was a chance of not doing irreparable harm to the environment.
Posted by Robert LePage, Thursday, 29 November 2012 7:59:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
spain did it..[the only jobs were in the building it
plus they did it on first generation..so will soon silde further into the dark ages.

just as we had corrupt scamers selling the junk sitting on peoples roofs..ONLY CAUSE A PR0MISE TO BUY BACK..lol clean power..KNOWing that in just a few years they will double the price paid by us muggs

clean power is the lie
we today hear of melting permafrost..leaching methane
ignoring all the leaking methane from frakking gas well leakage[the lol green alternative

plus we are paying for the pipelines and the high energy cost of cooling the stuff..via new infastructure[ports pipelines..when clearly the best use woyuld be burn it on site add it into the egsisting grid as electicity..

but here again we give advice to the freakers who thunk up enron scam
then took that globally led by ge and other govt lobbied bailouts [ie free bulbs..at a ten fold price of our egsisting bulbs

stop al govt assistance
if you want it PAY FULL COST..
plus punitive for what has allready been stolen..by sneaky spin/lies

its time you realised..less work..is the new norm
not perpetual; work..the people will allways want to be ammused..not perpetually abused.

the green thing was only the lasst gasp of a industrial age of enslavement..soon robots wil be cutting up carcuss..mining the ore..and jobs..ha/ha..work for dole..or in an ikea work camp..or sell ya organs for scrap values...welcome to capitalists hell.
Posted by one under god, Thursday, 29 November 2012 8:02:21 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think what Rehcub was presenting was not so much as a sudden switch
but the scene after the transition is completed.
The one thing missing in that scenario is storage of energy.
That is the biggest outstanding achievement yet to be found before we
can complete a transition.

At some point along the way we will have to accept that liquid fuels
will end and all transport will be electrical.
We run the risk of being pushed out of the international oil market
and will have to start the transition on perhaps 30% of the liquid
fuels that we presently use.

Just think what that sudden transition would be like.
Got a bicycle ?
Posted by Bazz, Thursday, 29 November 2012 8:46:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Would we need stowage, wind, wave, hydro.
More use can be made of Friction generators for steam, to power buses and trains.
No doubt timetables of work habits and manufacturing times would be more regulated.
Other than that there will be plenty of time for transition as equipment comes on line.
At the moment we are years behind USA in Transition of any sort.
Posted by 579, Thursday, 29 November 2012 9:11:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
rehctub - Your scenario of doom and gloom for every industry does not stand the test of logical thinking.
You imply that every industry is geared toward to the none renewable energy sector, TOTALLY WRONG.

1) Geologists are employed to find many other commodities than oil,coal and uranium they look for gold,diamonds and many other things that have nothing to do with energy supply.

2) Manufacturing industry won't collapse people still need steel for buildings, bridges etc

3)Airlines won't suffer people will still travel, coal oil etc is not moved around the world on planes.
Above are just a few there many more industry's that it would have very little effect on.
Posted by Philip S, Thursday, 29 November 2012 11:36:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
And at night we would use candles.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Thursday, 29 November 2012 1:05:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579, what are friction generators ? or was that fiction ?
Airlines will suffer, such use of oil products will not be allowed as
too wasteful of a precious resource.
Price will probably ground them first anyway.

Coal, you might notice today on the news, is becoming too expensive to mine.
There was an announcement that a coal mine was closing because it was
no longer economic. This happens because the seams get too small or the
coal degrades too much.

I believe there are non coal steel making techniques.
We will need prodigious amounts of electricity to run that I guess.

Know something, the transition has alreadt started.
It always used to be easy to park close enough to the local station.
Now, to do that I have to park about half way to home, so I don't bother anymore.
The population of the area has not changed.
Posted by Bazz, Thursday, 29 November 2012 1:25:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bazz, it might also be that that idiot Obama has been attacking coal mining so hard, & with shale gas competing with coal fired power generation, the US are now exporting as much coal as we do, & selling it cheaper.

Add new low cost mines opening all over Africa, & we are going to have to start winding back some of the work conditions, & costs in our mines, to remain in business.

The easiest way to do that is shut them down for 6 months, then reopen, with a new workforce. That is much easier than trying to talk sense to mining unions, or have long strikes, with all the rancor that develops.
Posted by Hasbeen, Thursday, 29 November 2012 3:57:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hasbeen,

"...shut them down for six months, then reopen, with a new workforce..."

You're obviously from the school of thought that believes if you treat your workforce like sh!t, then you'll prosper.

Good luck with that scenario.
Posted by Poirot, Thursday, 29 November 2012 4:06:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If the world switched to renewables tomorrow it wouldn't affect me.

I'd just ride my flying unicorn up to my palace on top of my mountain and get on with life.

A ridiculous hypothetical question deserves the same sort of answer.

The world will not and could not "switch tomorrow" so your apocalyptic scenarios are just nonsense.

Any changes would have to be staged gradually so minimise impact on several areas but it's worth considering that if the world converted all the existing coal stations to nuclear we would run out of known uranium deposits in a couple of decades.
Posted by wobbles, Thursday, 29 November 2012 6:14:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
No Poirot, in a long career in management I have only had to sack one person.

When I found myself way overstaffed in the Tourist cruise boat industry, during our pilot strike, I offered the staff a choice. I could lay off 25% of them, or they could all work a 4 day week. It was their choice, & I gave them a week to decide what they wanted me to do.

This was not as bad in this instance as it would be for many. Due to the nature of the business, with minimum 10 hour days, & weekend shifts there was a lot of overtime, so a 4 day income was still well above average income, & that was their choice.

Fortunately for all, unions were not involved, the seamen's union is one of the worst. They were responsible for the destruction of the Oz shipping industry.

However I have seen the bloody minded attitude of union leadership in a number of disputes, & know they would rather see a business close, than surrender any of the even extreme conditions in vulnerable industries.

The reason we have a much reduced abattoir industry is union bloody mindedness. Unfortunately most of those businesses did not reopen, & a number of towns became disaster zones because of this. It is a pity they would not do more than 4 hours work for a day's pay.

A quick look at the waterfront, & defence industries in Cairns display the same intransigence.
Posted by Hasbeen, Thursday, 29 November 2012 7:47:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes has been, the signs that our miners are floundering under the preasure of ridiculously high costs have been there for some time and, to think any government would be stupid enough to cause more pain, or at least they thought they would, by way of a huge tax on profits, defies logic.

I'm with you on this one, sack the lot and start again and, with a bit of luck we will have a government who cares about business, as opposed to treating them as an on call cash cow as these idiots do.

Good luck convincing anyone here though, as most of them have enjoyed the luxury of having life/jobs provided to them, from largely disrespected risk takers.

Now as for anyone who seriously thinks that I think the world could switch overnight, seriously! Get a grip!
Posted by rehctub, Thursday, 29 November 2012 7:56:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yep Rehctub over night or over to years, there is no way renewables could carry all but a minor bit of the load.

Yes Nuclear could, at huge expense, & why? There is still, after billions spent trying to prove the theory, no even minor evidence that CO2 is anything but a handy source of plant food.

Even if we are stupid to follow any of the renewable energy trail we now have planned, we would be fools. Just a quick look at Germany, Denmark, or the UK will show governments trying desperately to back of from their programs, with out admitting it is a total catastrophe.

Yes mate, even at 10% of renewables, & the problems they are causing to the respective countries grids, you would be wise to talk loudly, [so friends can find you in the dark], & carry a big torch. You'll need the torch to find your way to bed, in the dark.
Posted by Hasbeen, Thursday, 29 November 2012 8:37:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Butch . Today we know who the idiots are, they all have names and are all in shame.
The miners imposed their own level of payments to the AU people. So i would not be concerned for them.
As a nation we are in a state of consistent, and sustainable growth. No one can deny that.
We are subject to world shifts in economics, and doing fine.
If there wasn't the constant negativity and scaremongering from the opposition, We may be even better still.
After recent events, we can hope for change, and a return to liberalism.
This opposition have disgraced themselves to a point of disintegration
A restructure is needed now.
Posted by 579, Friday, 30 November 2012 6:50:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579....As a nation we are in a state of consistent, and sustainable growth. No one can deny that.

Funny how the experts appear to disagree with you old mate.

I say to you once again, get your head out of the sand, and take a good hard look around, otherwise the fall to reality will be even harder for the likes of you.
Posted by rehctub, Friday, 30 November 2012 9:40:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579, what are Friction generators ? I am curious.

also you said;
As a nation we are in a state of consistent, and sustainable growth.

Really, take mining out of the picture and the rest of the country is
like many other countries, in a zero growth economy.
Mining is fairly self contained, it all happens away from the rest of
the country and their product is exported.

The zero growth that other countries are experiencing applies to us as
well whether we like it or not. The mining is a lifeline that could be
cut at any time that China shifts its purchasing to the east Africa
rail terminals in East Africa.
I think it they are now completed or will be soon.
There appears to be two or three ports for iron ore in east Africa.
Some of the mines are owned by Chinese companies, so it is likely
that purchasing will cut into Australian sales.
The Chinese upgraded the rail lines to the coast. I can't see them
doing that and not shifting buying to Africa.
Posted by Bazz, Friday, 30 November 2012 10:22:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Friction generator can be anything that uses friction to make heat to produce steam.
Water being forced through small holes and producing flash steam.
Steam was never really taken up as a means of power transfer, as soon as fuel became available it was more convenient to use. The only heat source in those days was wood.
Mining adds 10% to the economy.
Butch. Who are the experts.
We have 22 years of consistent growth, there is no depression unless you live in QLD.
Posted by 579, Friday, 30 November 2012 10:57:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Water being forced through small holes and producing flash steam.

579, we are talking about powering a nation, not some science experiment in the back yard shed.

As for mining providing just 10%, yep, as usual, you dismiss the HUGE flow on effect mining provides and, take mining away and many businesses/contractors, along with their thousands of workers will be on the dole Que.

Don't believe me. Fine, keep dreaming, it's a free country.
Posted by rehctub, Friday, 30 November 2012 2:03:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Butch the mining and flow on effect is 10% to the economy.
Posted by 579, Friday, 30 November 2012 2:41:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So what you're saying 579, is that if we lost our mining, we could survive.
Posted by rehctub, Saturday, 1 December 2012 6:19:21 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Butch Abbott wants to put 240,000 people out of work. By not supporting the car industry.
Mining should be nationalized, so we all get a share, instead of Gina grabbing one million / hr for her part.
10% is 1.5 billion.
Gina's part is 2.9 billion. / yr
We shall survive be assured.
Posted by 579, Saturday, 1 December 2012 7:15:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579, where did Abbott say he wanted to put 240,000 out of work.
Really, you just made that up !
Now you will say that is what is implied by his policies, or perhaps
I should say, your biased opinion of his policies.
If we are talking about the car industry, then I have personally
experienced the GARO, the Great Australian Ripoff.

Friction, ok that is generated by moving something, where does the
energy come from to move it ?

579, you puzzle me, you seem to come up with a reasonable position
but it is supported by nonsense.
Posted by Bazz, Saturday, 1 December 2012 8:27:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579, we can all be a Hancock at any time we choose, simply go out to an arid place, where few even know exist, let alone want to imvest there, and take a risk.

Now whle I accept that Gena may not have taken the initial risk, it's not her fault she is the daughter a one of our all time largest risk takers.

Now if you wish to share in the spoils, all you need do is invest in companies that carry out VERY EXPENSIVE, HIGH RISK exploration.

If they succeed, and you increase your say, $10,000 investment to $1 million, would you be willing to allow others, who didnt take the risk, to share in your million?

I suspect not.

Besides, we already get a piece of the action, in royalties, for absolutely nothing.

So why not be happy with that! After all, we have done nothing for it.
Posted by rehctub, Saturday, 1 December 2012 3:53:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579 - Gina get $2 Million dollars per hour not $1 million.

Anyone want to bet she pays a lower rate of tax than the average PAYE Australian.
Posted by Philip S, Saturday, 1 December 2012 7:09:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sounds like sour grapes Phillip.

She would pay exactly the correct amount of personal income tax, then her company, trusts, what ever would pay pay roll tax, land tax, mining tax (there's a joke!) perhaps carbon tax, not to mention the countless amount of PAGY taxes, collected FREE OF CHARGE for the government on behalf of her employees.

I suggest that rather than bag wealthy people, perhaps you should be grateful that they create jobs for thousands, as god knows, it would be all so easy if one had that much money, to simply whack it in the bank and live the high life on the interest, without so much as a single care in the world.
Posted by rehctub, Saturday, 1 December 2012 9:44:34 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
rehctub - Actually it is not sour grapes personally she has done a very good job her net worth in 1992 was $75 Million dollars she is now worth upwards of $32 Billion that is impressive.

It was merely an observation on that most people in the very rich category do exactly what I said "pay a lower rate of tax than the average PAYE Australian".

Remember Allan Bond years ago paying only 1cent on the dollar.

Better luck next time with your snide comments
Posted by Philip S, Saturday, 1 December 2012 10:17:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Very sympathetic Butch but don't you think 32 billion is adequate compensation for something that is above ground, the real mining won't happen until the easy pickings have dried up.
Tom price was responsible for recognizing the highest quality of iron ore ever found in the Pilbara.
It just happened to be on Hancock lease.
Bazz I presume the energy required to turn a moving object would come from an electric motor. Steel on wood generated 500 degrees of heat, and produced flash steam, which can turn back to water after use, so no use for tonnages of water needs to be carried.
Abbott has no plans for a car industry in AU and has reneged on child care.
Posted by 579, Sunday, 2 December 2012 5:59:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579; Uuummm, I don't know what to say !
I know computer intelligence has made big strides, but to be able to
engage in a discussion like this is remarkable.
Posted by Bazz, Sunday, 2 December 2012 8:03:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Phillip, it is simple LEGAL accounting.

You have your gross income, take away legal deductions, then pay tax on the balance.

The trouble is, many people take the tax paid and divide that into the gross income, which distorts the figure. But hey, it's sure sounds good.

Kerry Packer had another bright idea, whereby he would take over companies that had huge accumulated tax losses, expend the losses and close the company.

Again, fully legal at the time, and as he quite rightly said, "anyone who pays one red cent more in tax than they should is a dill, cause our governments will only waste it anyway".

Boy, how true were those words over the past five years.
Posted by rehctub, Sunday, 2 December 2012 11:02:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bazz Who knows where it could end up. The trouble with inventions is, they can't be found in a developed state. If that is what you mean by not knowing what to say.
Butch We all know there are tax crooks every where, and the bigger they are the more they will get away with.
Negative gearing will be done away with, it only inflates the cost of housing, and land.
Posted by 579, Sunday, 2 December 2012 11:28:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here we go again, the old negative gearing thing.

My advise, is have the government build plenty of gov houses, before they change the law, otherwise the homeless rate will go through the roof.

Investors simply won't invest with after tax dollars.

As for avoiding taxes, if the laws are wrong, change them, but don't blame people for being smart.
Posted by rehctub, Monday, 3 December 2012 12:51:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Investors as you say are the scourge of the property market.
Negative gearing was invented by people for their own benefit and theirs only.
Before negative gearing the market was supplied by builders, building houses in between contracts. But then smart asses seen money to be made from investing in already established houses and now we have a shortage.

Loopholes is what you are talking about, found by lawyers to aid their wealthy mates, and make themselves rich at the same time. People have to be forced to pay their fair share of taxation. As America is finding out.
It's more than being SMART, it's more like avoidance.
Posted by 579, Monday, 3 December 2012 5:53:50 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Abolish negative gearing ?
Wait, haven't we been here before ?
About 1970s we abolished negative gearing and rental houses just went
pooff and disappeared.
The government could not cope and reintroduced negative gearing.

Is my memory on this intact ? I think so.
Posted by Bazz, Monday, 3 December 2012 8:19:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579....Before negative gearing the market was supplied by builders, building houses in between contracts. But then smart asses seen money to be made from investing in already established houses and now we have a shortage.

Yes, however, rents were commony about 10 to 12% of the value of the property.

Today, rents are generally about 3 to 6%.

So negative gearing actually helped keep rents down, as investors, although not enjoying the great returns, were able to claim their losses.

Can you imagine the outcry if rents were at 10 to 12% today.

You have to remember one very important fact that effects almost every decision made, that being, for every action, there is a reaction.

Be very careful what you wish for, especially if you are a renter,as rents would go through the roof when new houses are bypassed by investors, in favor of a more favorable investment.
Posted by rehctub, Monday, 3 December 2012 10:00:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That very subject is being talked about right now.
That may well be why there is a gigantic housing lot is being built by the vic govt; it says for needy people.
All the builders houses were returning was the mortgage money each month.
When that stopped, house prices rose and havn't stopped yet.
There are lots of unscrupulous investors around. And that makes it unfair for renters also, as seen on tv
Posted by 579, Monday, 3 December 2012 12:48:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579,

Your complete lack of economic credentials is blatantly obvious.

Firstly if an investor buys something to make a profit, he can write off expenses (interest) against the profit.

Secondly, if an investor cannot make a profit he won't invest in buying or building houses. Idiots have stopped negative gearing only to have to allow it again later.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Monday, 3 December 2012 1:14:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
579, another reason investors buy houses is that banks usually don't mind lending on bricks and mortar.

As for being unscrupulous Investors, I forgot, we were supposed to be a charity.
Posted by rehctub, Monday, 3 December 2012 7:24:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy