i dont mind the thrust of this article & whilst not a socialist,...

i dont mind the thrust of this article & whilst not a socialist, I can see the need for a head "honcho for the purposes of 1-12...

Kinc need not apply...ha lol on your comment Gt

Niceone & Massey, its abit more than just Propty as Invstment, I just happen to be going into that demograph (soon, not a sob yet) but i have been involved with a few that want to downsize, etc etc & some costs & obstacles exist, maybe not to the extent listed in this rather large screed...

However, several of the wealthiest people that I know, and know of, have developed specific holdings & come off the aged housing bubble with a small fortune, and many, got advice early, (by that I mean as early as 2003-4, & subsequently ,ie 07late) - selling down large parcels along the way.

The costs mentioned in this article are what i have posted about recently on HC, as those that have been rolled into cost bases, & marked up with profit margins, perhaps for the 3 rd time in less than 15 years...such is the nature of the elderly, & the arrangements /by which these age care type buildings & their facilities are put together.

the wealthy do get richer, but the consumer has paid thru the nose, with devastating effects on things like...
- the oldies ability to hand down/pass on wealth to potental younger home buyers-spenders etc

- the drain on the public purse, re govt pensions that may have been reduced by either means test, that became payable due to high costs paid...sometimes a large drain on their retirement funds that were way over the top, IMHO, of course

All in all, i reckon it contains some good points of view =

PS compare this with the BS article (couple months ago) that contains measures how a retirees home was going to be confiscated when an "aged care" facility test was considered & put forward by the socialists... now that is a croc...