country gal/quote...

""OUG,why do you think that landlords are rich speculators?""

by and large,..*they hold two valuable assets
plus likely got tax advantages..from govt

[ok that could be speculative...
but it is a generalisation...!

that describes those..my opinions are biased on]

""Most landlords earn not much more than the average income,""

yes clever aint it..[depreciation...
and making a book loss
while increasing the total asset values...

that needs clever accounting
as well as plentyfull govt help
based on traditional furfies]

trusts are nototrious..re that sort of thing
with the trust owning..and paying for near all expenditure's
and the truste getting so little..[lol]..

yet holding so much more
[under the family trust]...paying for the rest of it
owninmg it...while the trustee can cry poor

""I own one rental property myself""
your the expeption country

i could easilly divide my house into 5 units..
and become a landlord as well...but then im not poor..i got choices

but look at your next statement..

"(which is negative-geared at the moment"",

so you know..how generouse that all is
as well..*if your renters are getting govt subsidy[rent assistance]
you must see this illusion of futuure wealth..is just that..a delusion

for 30 dollars more
the renters could be buying their own house

but..of course for that...
THEY cant take advantage of netative gearing...[lol]

""as the rental has not yet increased
to the stage..where it covers my interest cost,
let alone the capital repayments..*I have to make).""

i told you it was an illusion

selling us on a dream...
with govt incentaive
forcing the 'private sector'..to asume govt burden
who inevitably fail...[look at storm/enron..etc]

[look into puting it under a trust]

and pray your renters
keep getting rent assistance

[you must see that you bought it..for too much
because so many small investers..like you
got caughtup in a trick..that made the true price of housing go into a bubble]

that is in process of popping*
as the intrest rates are about to go nuts

dear country gal
you were tricked
loosing good money after bad mone

country gal/quote...

""OUG,why do you think that landlords are rich speculators?""

by and large,..*they hold two valuable assets
plus likely got tax advantages..from govt

[ok that could be speculative...
but it is a generalisation...!

that describes those..my opinions are biased on]

""Most landlords earn not much more than the average income,""

yes clever aint it..[depreciation...
and making a book loss
while increasing the total asset values...

that needs clever accounting
as well as plentyfull govt help
based on traditional furfies]

trusts are nototrious..re that sort of thing
with the trust owning..and paying for near all expenditure's
and the truste getting so little..[lol]..

yet holding so much more
[under the family trust]...paying for the rest of it
owninmg it...while the trustee can cry poor

""I own one rental property myself""
your the expeption country

i could easilly divide my house into 5 units..
and become a landlord as well...but then im not poor..i got choices

but look at your next statement..

"(which is negative-geared at the moment"",

so you know..how generouse that all is
as well..*if your renters are getting govt subsidy[rent assistance]
you must see this illusion of futuure wealth..is just that..a delusion

for 30 dollars more
the renters could be buying their own house

but..of course for that...
THEY cant take advantage of netative gearing...[lol]

""as the rental has not yet increased
to the stage..where it covers my interest cost,
let alone the capital repayments..*I have to make).""

i told you it was an illusion

selling us on a dream...
with govt incentaive
forcing the 'private sector'..to asume govt burden
who inevitably fail...[look at storm/enron..etc]

[look into puting it under a trust]

and pray your renters
keep getting rent assistance

[you must see that you bought it..for too much
because so many small investers..like you
got caughtup in a trick..that made the true price of housing go into a bubble]

that is in process of popping*
as the intrest rates are about to go nuts

dear country gal
you were tricked
loosing good money after bad money

see how it gets messy
our house prices are in a huge bubble
the clever money got out 7 mths ago...[knowing they can buy it back after the bubble bursts..for one third at least off then market prices]

""I think its wrong to take so long
to get rid of a tenant
that is blantantly not doing what they should)""

your quite right..!

renting is a right..that should have attatched duties
[thats why my home stays empty]

""The result would be higher rents
due to a shortage of properties.""

check out your local house auctions
many failing to sell...even at big discounts

""when the demand slackens off.
It will only hurt renters more.""

the same homes are there..!

regardless of who has title
regardless of who gets its rent

renters find homes to rent
according to how much they can afford
and the blood left in the stone...is little

[even your govt housing..mob
that likes them empty
because the tennents
want it like new...its a sad circle]

better they got their super to you
so you can get out..for what it was worth

while you could still get out
this topic is the only hope many could have had
to return that bit extra to you..before the whole market goes bust

look what withdrawing first home buyers govt money has done
next its broke renters

I think Fester has nailed this issue rather well. When I was growing up during the 60's, it was common practice for people to build their own modest home. I knew a family who's father did this as it was the only way he could afford to put a roof over his rapidly growing family (they went on to a total of 13 kids).

Today, the Government has imposed extremely restrictive legislation on owner builders. To put on an iron roof yourself will attract a $22,000 fine if you're caught and lets be honest, it's not hard to put a bit of tin on a roof. Then there's the rules concerning scaffolding, public liability......the list goes on and on! To add to this, the tax of trades people such as electricians and plumbers must be paid up front creating a myriad of paperwork.

Then, to add insult to injury, many new residential developments place restrictions on what can be built so as "not to cause devaluation of the area!" At one time I considered moving back into town and found a suitable block of land for sale, but was told that I wasn't allowed to place a small, pre-fab home on the site. I had to build a McMansion or nothing.

In France and other countries, the people would rebel and force the Government to back-pedal swiftly, but in the good old land of Oz, we just cop it on the chin. Our Governments and their rules and regulations are our worst enemies and we sit on our hands and do nothing!

OUG, where I own my house, there is no problems with clearance prices. I bought for <$200,000, same house now worth >$250,000. I will pay tax on this one day (when I sell). Same area has NO houses available for rent. Zero vacancy rate. Same as the place I moved to (where I had fully intended to rent for years) - result is that I had to buy to get a decent house (one that wasnt being eaten out by termites).

When I refered to the people that I know that have rental properties, I was talking about their wages income. Most are not business owners, they earn a living working for someone else. Most would earn <$60,000 (with a couple of exceptions). even for those exceptions, they are risking their hard-earned - they should be entitled to claim against the income they make, any costs they have in incurring it. Do you lodge a tax return? Claim any deductions at all? Its the same concept. Depreciation is not a magic number, its a gradual write-down in the value of something that is not meant to last forever (eg that tenant is likely to want a new kitchen in 5 years time - I cant claim the cost of that straight away, only over time, as it is designed to last for more than 1 year).

There is a lot more to it than you think there is. And I go back to the statement that few of the very rich own residential property (other than what they live in themselves).

Rehctub, You opened your post with this:-

Many people today cannot afford to buy a home, yet, they also have plenty of dollars locked away in their super. So, why not allow them to access this to buy their own home.

I'm just wondering how someone gets to have "plenty of dollars locked away in their super" when they haven't been able to buy a home? Can I ask what age group this refers to, because my view of the logical flow of events is that, once employed, people save to buy a house and then only in later years does their super become a "significant amount" that would have any affect on buying a house.
I've been paying into my super (on top of my employers contributions) for over 20 years and still don't have enough to buy a house in the area I live in.

I'm not saying it's wrong, I just want to make sure I understand the situation. Or maybe you meant that people might have enough money in their for a DEPOSIT on a house? Look forward to your response.
Thanks