respectfully, in return...1. Very few people are invulnerable....

  1. 5,395 Posts.
    respectfully, in return...

    1. Very few people are invulnerable.
    Plently of historical evidence available of investors selling for a loss.
    No one said property investment was all caviar and champagne.
    Most investors should be buying an asset that generate a positive return with the need for a subsidy, even if it is just one.

    One of the reason why property returns are negative is because prices are too high for rents to cover the financing cost. Why? The ability to negatively gear allows speculators to bid prices above what would provide a positive return because they want to speculate on the capital growth.

    Are investors the only ones working their asses off? Why does one person working their ass off deserve to be given a bidding advantage via a subsidy over another who is also working their ass off?

    2. It really depends on what market you are talking about.

    3. I suggest people don’t bid on an investment that produces a negative return.

    Who knows how much will exit property? If they exit someone is going to buy it right? If no one buys it they can’t exit. So what will be the net exit if one sell to another?

    4. Homeowners, owning as oppose to them being a renter renting. Whats the net change in dwelling demand? This alone answer everything else you asked in later part of this point 4. You do understand the concept of net demand don’t you?

    5. Why can’t you or rather someone buy or rent locally?

    6. I have to ask - why would the value of every dollar you earn be worth less if property values crash??. How many people will be made redundant? Every potential home buyer?

arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.