What a load of horse-shit. Essentially, renting residential property "was" a business, but it's current incarnation is an "investment", which the legal, financial, and economic infrastructure is constructed to support. If it weren't an "investment" promising easy money, it possibly would be a business.
Well that's probably what a lot of poorly informed people who have never been a serious investor think, but it's not so, it's a business and should be treated as such.
But thanks for your opinion.
Take risks - if you win you will become wealthy, if you lose you will become wise
Well that's probably what a lot of poorly informed people who have never been a serious investor think, but it's not so, it's a business and should be treated as such.
But thanks for your opinion.
Nonsense. Suburbanites perceive property as an "investment", not a "business". The risk perception is entirely different. Compared to hotels, which are in the "business" of accommodation, the value of that business is derived by the offer, not by capital gains. Secondly, a hotel is a "business" because it has far greater scalability than a rental property.
What a load of horse-shit. Essentially, renting residential property "was" a business, but it's current incarnation is an "investment", which the legal, financial, and economic infrastructure is constructed to support. If it weren't an "investment" promising easy money, it possibly would be a business.
Rufus said "it is a business and should be run professionally, which mum and dad investors tend to not do". (bold mine)
So why say "What a load of horse-shit" only ta then just end up effectively agreeing with him (from wot I can make of it anyway) that while it should be run as a business, at this time that's not necessarily being dun by tha ma 'n pa types?
A Professional Demographer to an amateur demographer:"negative natural increase will never outweigh the positive net migration"
Except that ... a corporation cannot run one business at a loss to offset revenue from a second business, but an individual can.
A corporation can offer services at a loss to offset revenue from other sources.
An individual can offer services at a loss to offset revenue from other sources.
Those loss-making services could be investment properties, share investments, gardening services, or any other 'sole trader' type of business.
No difference conceptually. In both cases it's a single entity offsetting income within their own business. It's not two separate entities.
However in both cases, if there are two separate companies, then the revenue can't be offset. For example if an individual creates a separate company to hold the property then any losses can't be offset against personal income.
"The truth is that there are no good men, or bad men. It is the deeds that have goodness or badness in them. There are good deeds, and bad deeds. Men are just men."
Nonsense. Suburbanites perceive property as an "investment", not a "business". The risk perception is entirely different. Compared to hotels, which are in the "business" of accommodation, the value of that business is derived by the offer, not by capital gains. Secondly, a hotel is a "business" because it has far greater scalability than a rental property.
"Nonsense" ... "Suburbanites" ... "Perception" ... etc - More of tha same generally argumentative 'n useless waffle - For mine.
Rufus said "it is a business and should be run professionally, which mum and dad investors tend to not do". (bold mine)
So why say "What a load of horse-shit" only ta then just end up effectively agreeing with him (from wot I can make of it anyway) that while it should be run as a business, at this time that's not necessarily being dun by tha ma 'n pa types?
Most of the time Roddy doesn't even understand what others are saying - it's why he constantly digs himself into holes that he can't get out of, and then resorts to waffling about trolls and suburbanites when he gets completely stuck.
"The truth is that there are no good men, or bad men. It is the deeds that have goodness or badness in them. There are good deeds, and bad deeds. Men are just men."
Nonsense. Suburbanites perceive property as an "investment", not a "business". The risk perception is entirely different. Compared to hotels, which are in the "business" of accommodation, the value of that business is derived by the offer, not by capital gains. Secondly, a hotel is a "business" because it has far greater scalability than a rental property.
The value of a business is determined by the value of future returns.
Take risks - if you win you will become wealthy, if you lose you will become wise
Whether you realise it or not Chris(?), that question of yours indicates to me that at a pretty fundamental level you concur with Rufus' statement that "A higher % of IP's would be held by wealthy investors rather than mum and dad investors" - With 'wealthy' investors being able to wear the initial losses whilst 'mum and dad' investors are way less likely to be able to.
I do agree with that. What I don't agree with is the notion that the wealthy few do not use NG.
That's what Peter is trying to perpetuate is the notion that higher income earners would stick with an asset making heavy losses in the hope that there will be future gains. If this was the case they would be shouting from the rafters to get NG stamped out. The best way to make money is to monopolise, how do you do that if every tom dick and harry is jumping in
I do agree with that. What I don't agree with is the notion that the wealthy few do not use NG.
That's what Peter is trying to perpetuate is the notion that higher income earners would stick with an asset making heavy losses in the hope that there will be future gains. If this was the case they would be shouting from the rafters to get NG stamped out. The best way to make money is to monopolise, how do you do that if every tom dick and harry is jumping in
No, I'm saying that the wealthy don't NEED negative gearing to get them through the early years when income is less than expenses. But the wealthy will still end up claiming every single dollar off their income.
The non-wealthy mum and dad investors will be less able to do that, so a different group of investors will enter the market. That group will be more wealthy investors who will be looking for higher rental returns. They will run their investments as a business.
Is that what you want?
Take risks - if you win you will become wealthy, if you lose you will become wise
No, I'm saying that the wealthy don't NEED negative gearing to get them through the early years when income is less than expenses. But the wealthy will still end up claiming every single dollar off their income.
The non-wealthy mum and dad investors will be less able to do that, so a different group of investors will enter the market. That group will be more wealthy investors who will be looking for higher rental returns. They will run their investments as a business.
Is that what you want?
Just from the odd snippet here and there it would seem that tha push would also seem to be beginning for 'institutional' type investors (if that terminology of mine makes sense?) to look at getting into providing rental housing.
With there being a bit of an underlying debate as to whether they should be expected to provide it at cost plus a 'reasonable' return all on their Pat Malone (as in on their "own" for them wot don't savvy Strine ... ) OR if guv (as in tax payers generally) should subsidise them ta ensure they do this necessary job 'n get a reasonable return for doing so ...
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