they missed out negative gearing, page-3

Negative gearing has served it's purpose and is now well overdue for reform. It's quick clear the community, as a whole, has an issue with what it has now done to the housing market.

So you may be correct in saying that it is legal, but does that make it right for the community?

I feel these two sentences sum up the issue the community has on negative gearing.

"Losses from negative-geared property investments are currently tax-deductible in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, which are all countries in the Commonwealth of Nations."

"Negative gearing is permissible in Canada and New Zealand, but the taxation and finance regulation systems do not permit it to take place on such a large scale as in Australia."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_gearing_(Australia)

So of the three countries from the odd 250 that allow NG, Australia is a the leader in this taxation policy.