'
we've moved interstate this year and we seem to be spending 20k a month at the moment. but we have no problem handing that. and we will still have more working capital than last year at the end of the tax year.'
That would suggest that you have passive income from investments in the order of $250k PA ater tax. Which in turn suggests assets in excess of $2.5m with a SUPER environment or thick end of $4m if outside of super and paying marginal tax rates.
I suspect that most posters on HC would not be in such a position. The point of posting the table was to show that a multiplier of 22 may be more appropriate than 16, which was a the point of the thread. Good on the poster for attempting to bring some value to the debate and taking the effort to produce said table.
Secondly your assertion to have only 25% in property is easy if one has substantial assets, but lots of folks have a house that they have been in for 20/30 years and represents a large portion of their assets. To sell the family home would, probbaly, trigger impacts for age pension and other benefits. A good financial advisor should be used in this case.
Thirdly, and purely from a fiscal point of view, there are valid arguments for using most of ones resources and buying the most expensive house one can, and going on the age pension. Combined with a reverse mortgage for living expenses, it can add close to $1m to the asset pool. Complex yes, morally bankrupt probably yes, but from a pure fiscal view it does make sense. Rent out the spare rooms on AIRBNB and life is a peach.
Good luck with your investments, clearly you have done well in life and deserve your retirement in the luxury you have.
