Who really uses Negative Gearing, page-9

  1. 3,140 Posts.
    Jeez what a display of ignorance passed off as facts. Do you even understand why Australia and Canada dodged the GFC? And what triggered the GFC in the first place? As for removing negative gearing driving up rents- that rubbish argument has been widely dispelled. If we believed your "facts" without life long NG Australia will slip into the ocean.

    I'll agree with you on one point though. The only thing keeping Australia going right now is the property bubble. Its too late to fix that now though. It has become so bloated that NG or not, it will collapse sooner rather than later - either under the weight of its own inflated expectations or due to a downturn (read mining bust) or market shock.

    Negative Gearing was intended to encourage investment in NEW property and it clearly did not work. It just encourages the speculation in pre-existing property that has helped lead to a massive price bubble and costs the governments 10s of billions of dollars in tax revenue each year. In other words it takes money from the average taxpayer to fund loss making investments by property speculators.

    Time to dump this antiquated and ineffective tax law. Happy to wait for the other side of the crash before doing it though. You may want to take a look at the Mexican stand off between buyers and sellers that is happening in Perth right to see the future in the eastern states in 2016. By the time this is over the public will be demanding tax and FIRB reforms to stop this ever happening again.

    "Only when the tide goes out do you discover who's been swimming naked." - WB. We'll find out in the next 12-18 months I think.
    Last edited by HarajukuIsland: 26/04/15
 
arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.