in the boom, and expand to full advantage the Govt's negative - gearing impact, where the taxpayer foots the ' make-belief ' losses. Currently @ $ 33 B, claims Mr Sayce.

The Economics isn't hard to fathom. The Banks create the finance from investors, with exorbitant lending margins, abetted by the RBA, which has up the ante 5 consecutive rises. The borrower is rewarded by the Govt for claiming all his expenses, real and imagined for 30 plus years or more. The RE Agent either buys the property at an inflated price, do a quick spruce renovation, and resells, or gets into the rental market, where he can claim NG, and prepare for his next acquisition. One RE Agent in Surfer's sold 20 properties to her family alone. Her tax bill was picked up by the ATO, which allowed deductions for advertising, auctioning, and promotion to wit ?

The elusive benefits become apparent when elderly persons can still draw the Pension, health card and carer's pension, and still benefit from owning several properties which return $ 470 /500 pw rental, pay nil tax, are eligible for a disability pension, house cleaning/ fixtures, seniors discounts. nursing aides, and a variety of rental allowances, supplements, and bursaries to enhance their incomes. Even their travel and internet expenses are subsidized.

Builders, brickies, electricians, plumbers etc all derive an income from the Housing sector, and other pursuits. They are obliged to pay income tax, which go into Govt coffers, which boosts Rudd's credibility, and from which he provided a stimulus to all and sundry i.e Labor and Union mates. Some have convenient infinite short memories.

The State's derive income from Property sales, stamp duty, land tax, rates and water charges etc. Property is registered at the Land's Office which requires a nominal fee.

No economic benefit ?

One has only to cruise the Gold Coast Canals and Broadwater, to see where the wealth of the Nation lies.

The govmint could supply both sanity and stability to the marketplace simply by replacing the 21k first home owners grant with fixed (low) rate first home loans, capped at say $200k.

Grim >>The govmint could supply both sanity and stability to the marketplace simply by replacing the 21k first home owners grant with fixed (low) rate first home loans, capped at say $200k.

The interest rates are just some of the problem. The real issue of affordabillity is the spending habbits of many wishing to own a home.

If they address this, then many of them would afford a home. After all, if one borrows say $300K, they need to find an extra $60 odd dollars per week per 1%, or, one less night out a month, or, four packs of fags a week, or, a carton of grog each week.

Now on the other hand, if you make buying a home easy, they will most likely find another way to waste their money.

So Bryan Kavanagh and the author.

Do you still think that esculating land prices do not contribute to employment, or do little to stimulate the ecconomy?

So where is the author on this topic. It's becomming quite common for authors to start a thread, then vanish. But why?

They author says>>There's no more productivity in buying and selling houses than there is buying and selling shares.

Utter utter crap!

When one buys/sells shares, there is the broker, the registery office and that's about it.

On the other hand, when a house is sold,bought, there is the agent, the lawyer, the inspectors, the cerifiers, the removalists, the cleaners, the repairers, the maintanance workers...the list goes on.

Why don't these authors come back and defend thier submissions?