Hi Trumpster,

"they assured the populace that it would be good for renters because house prices would fall". Unlike YOU, I'm note converse with what was said in the Stone Age. When and where was it said, YOU can make up what YOU like with your ancient history. I ask were you a Protectionist or a Free Trader back in 1901? It was an argument about tariffs, not between Australia and other countries, but tariffs between Australian states, times change for most of us, but not for YOU, Trumpster.

BTW, We don't hear a squeak out of YOU about the Iran war. Dangerous Doctor Donald is negotiating!.....WITH HIS BLOODY SELF! And you think Donald's the New Messiah, what a joke!

Paul 1405 - I have been a bit busy and just catching up with this article.
This News.com.au article from three days ago tells what one landlord thinks of this nonsense of the Labor Budget. I am sure I have more on this but I shall just put this one here for now as I need time to look. Happy to oblige though.
https://www.news.com.au/finance/economy/federal-budget/landlord-with-100-properties-warns-new-negative-gearing-rules-will-create-twoclass-economy/news-story/fa24f4ae63abe22e0655b61bd7bd7f0e

Hi Farnortherner,

I'm sure there is one landlord that doesn't agree with changers to CGT and NG, there could be more, particularly those who are doing very well by the status quo.

Just as news.com, "Murdock Gutter Press", would not publish anything that agrees with Labor policy, you don't agree with Labor policy also. In my view its a very moderate shift, and a lot more will be needed if the housing problem is to be resolved any time soon.

"I ask were you a Protectionist or a Free Trader back in 1901? It was an argument about tariffs, not between Australia and other countries, but tariffs between Australian states, times change for most of us, but not for YOU, Trumpster."

If anyone is fluent in gibberish, can they translate Paul's latest opus for me.

Ttbn, the Labor troll asked for evidence of frequent claims that rents will rise by $50 to $100 a week as stated by many investment and real estate groups but he ignores this from such an expert in an earlier post: "With respect to Treasury's modellers, I think they've significantly underestimated what's coming for renters over the next couple of years.

My view is that rents are more likely to rise by 10% or more, and there are several concrete reasons for that."
Well with average rents in major capitals already at around $600 to $800 with some much higher, do the maths.
And this from the link posted by Farnortherner from a major investor who says the changes will make him richer while it hits renters:
It is no secret that Australians are already fed up with rent prices across the board, but Mr Gordon reckons it is about to get worse.

“I believe the biggest issue here is that if rents go through a massive surge, which I think they will, how does a young Australian who plans to buy in three to five years, how will they ever buy?” he asked.

“The grim part is this will create a two-class economy, and it is my benefit for this to happen, but this is extremely bad for the next lot of people to come through.”

Hi Trumpster,

I was making the point that times change, and you see things as static and unmovable. As a total regressive you resist all change. The 1901 story is as relevant today as much as your Hawke government reference from 40 years ago.

Hi Mikko2,

Other than a vague reference to "investment and real estate sources", you can't produce anyone saying; "renters could face weekly increases of \(\$25\) to \(\$100\) following the federal budget's sweeping tax reforms." Nor can you give reasons. I could say rents will increase by $25 to $100 "AFTER CHRISTMAS" I'm sure they will sometime after Christmas. I note the $25 has now become $50 in your recent post, you have to remember what you make up.