Average wage : $43,ish Population : 8,ish Median age : 33.4
What suburb? The name of the burb or postcode?
A Lurker
22 Sep 2014, 02:36 PM
I live in an old Sydney suburb. Most houses are at least 100 years old on very small land sizes. My land value is nearly double Paul's threshold. While it's mostly a pre-retirement area many of the retirees that remain would not be considered wealthy, some might even be flattered to be called middle class. Many have lived in the area for many decades and would be extremely upset to have to move along to a new neighbourhood that had lower land value but a more expensive house on it.
Calling Paul's idea ill-conceived is being kind.
No-one would have to move. The enhanced PLS would ensure they remain in place.
You fail...and you troll as it is not "My' idea at all. I simply support the policy as determined.
Why on Earth would I want to tell *you* where I live? You'd just start agitating for extra taxes here.
So I could validate your claims. Ok, I accept then your claim is bullshit.
peter fraser
22 Sep 2014, 03:07 PM
Policy? Policy?
there is no damned policy - only what you have made up on the run.
Absolutely no one is proposing this rubbish as policy except you.
Not just me....lol, bugger, you fail again. Not you day today Peter....
"In the light of the debate over the future sustainability of the age pension spend Australian Workers Union national secretary Paul Howes has weighed into the debate saying the means test for pensioners must include the family home to stop wealthy home owners taking taxpayers money that could go to needier parts of the community." http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/age-pension-and-the-family-home/5237904
So I could validate your claims. Ok, I accept then your claim is bullshit. Not just me....lol, bugger, you fail again. Not you day today Peter....
"In the light of the debate over the future sustainability of the age pension spend Australian Workers Union national secretary Paul Howes has weighed into the debate saying the means test for pensioners must include the family home to stop wealthy home owners taking taxpayers money that could go to needier parts of the community." http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/age-pension-and-the-family-home/5237904
An extract from the evidence that you produce as policy -
The proposal to tighten age pension eligibility by including part of the value of the family home in the assets test has been widely publicised. The present system is certainly inequitable. A couple can live in an expensive home, have up to $238,000 in financial assets and receive the full pension, while a renting couple with no assets would get exactly the same pension, plus maybe a bit extra for rent assistance.
It's not on - think about the practical difficulties. Every home would have to be regularly valued, and there would have to be weighting given to areas such as Sydney where home prices are at record highs. And what sort of consideration would be given to those who were asset rich and cash poor?
If the rules changed, the media would be full of stories of cash-strapped widows living in run-down houses in good suburbs being forced out on the street.
Would people have to resort to reverse mortgages to live, or would they spend up big so they could retain the full pension? And who would pay $600 to have their home valued every five years, then suffer a drop in their pension if a property boom meant the value of their home had gone up?
A few media stories and a look at the proposal by actuaries isn't a declaration of policy support by a political party. I can find more media articles on flying saucers than this "policy"
The actuaries report by the way discusses completely abolishing the means test on the aged pension and calculates the cost of that. Page 46 - I don't see how that in any way supports your "policy"
An extract from the evidence that you produce as policy -
The proposal to tighten age pension eligibility by including part of the value of the family home in the assets test has been widely publicised. The present system is certainly inequitable. A couple can live in an expensive home, have up to $238,000 in financial assets and receive the full pension, while a renting couple with no assets would get exactly the same pension, plus maybe a bit extra for rent assistance.
It's not on - think about the practical difficulties. Every home would have to be regularly valued, and there would have to be weighting given to areas such as Sydney where home prices are at record highs. And what sort of consideration would be given to those who were asset rich and cash poor?
If the rules changed, the media would be full of stories of cash-strapped widows living in run-down houses in good suburbs being forced out on the street.
Would people have to resort to reverse mortgages to live, or would they spend up big so they could retain the full pension? And who would pay $600 to have their home valued every five years, then suffer a drop in their pension if a property boom meant the value of their home had gone up?
A few media stories and a look at the proposal by actuaries isn't a declaration of policy support by a political party. I can find more media articles on flying saucers than this "policy"
Peter Thanks tho Zaph, the policy discussion is now about VG amounts, so Noel is behind the times. No valuations required. The value in pubic forums like APF are tangible at times and this is one such time. I do note Noel is taking interest in the enhanced PLS however...and Andrew is now aware of the VG discussions.
Peter Thanks tho Zaph, the policy discussion is now about VG amounts, so Noel is behind the times. No valuations required. The value in pubic forums like APF are tangible at times and this is one such time. I do note Noel is taking interest in the enhanced PLS however...and Andrew is now aware of the VG discussions.
The Valuer General in each state won't use exactly the same methodology or reference values.
You may have noticed that trains don't run from Cairns to Melbourne on the standard state gauge rail for much the same reason.
Any expressed market opinion is my own and is not to be taken as financial advice
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy