Forum Replies Created
If anyone is not too busy visualising abundance, or whatever, and up for a good laugh, try this link.
One guy's humourous foray into a tony robbins motivation seminar.
Originally posted by foundation:Originally posted by splosh:You could simply…
[stun]
Simply? Wayne’s a lucky bloke if he has a lazy $225,000 sitting around that he can plonk into his loan!
Yes, tounge was planted somewhat firmly in cheek, ….but seriously he could possibly sell another IP and consolidate.
You could simply pay out half the loan and that would halve your interest bill making it cash flow neutral.
Originally posted by JohnSmith:
I would also add that it is Australians love of property that is helping to keep its population wealthy.[baaa]
hahaha that’s Gold! We should extend this love to other asset classes and we could all be even more wealthy!How about air? We all need it, they arent making any more of it.. so lets all love it and charge ever increasing prices for it and we’ll all be rich beyond our dreams. And our thinking with reagrd to the price of air will create a more equitable distribuition of wealth! Wonderful! [blink]
I know, how about Bootstraps! Australians should love their bootstraps. [blink]
An early 80s road bike. It has only one speed and has only a front brake. It is very fast, efficient, low maintence and helps keep me fit. It cost about $250 dollars to build – most of the cost was in the tyres.
Faster than a car for most trips in metro Melbourne, and spanks most other bikes on the road.
Originally posted by gmh454:Foundation may be able to help me here but there was a significant Russian economist in the early 1920s who came up with cycles within cycles and charted them not back to the 19th Cent but the early 18th Cent.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kondratiev_waves
gmh is this what you’re referring to?
Originally posted by foundation:Originally posted by brucemarg:Most of them will need to rent our properties a lot longer than they intend. The ‘now generation’ is great for us who have considered tommorrow and don’t want to be working then.
Just who are you lumping into this “generation”? And are the responsible, debt-conscious, youngsters (see splosh’s post above) really going to be happy supporting your generation when the burden of debt is crushing their hopes of a comfortable, self-funded retirement? Remember, the baby-boomers are only going to remain in control of this country’s policies for so long, then you’ll have to face the embittered “younger generation” who have been priced out of owning their own homes, forced to delay having a family, taxed highly to pay for the older generation’s welfare and healthcare, etc, etc…
Don’t be smug… Good luck…
F.[cowboy2]Indeed, the young may be long on ipods and short on big ticket non-productive assets; but they are long on something else: education.
Every weekend, in the backyards of rental properties around the country, sitting around makeshift barbies, are young qualifed professionals (a typical saturday arvo at my place might include laywers, doctors, engineers, economists, statisticans, mathematicians, and a housing policy officer), and they are deciding the future policies of this country…
I’m a member of this younger generation who have only seen the upside of things, but I actually think in a way we are actually doing it tough compared to the last few generations.
Sure.. luxuries are very very cheap compared to what they used to be just a few years ago, but guess what? The necessaties such as housing are more expensive.
Look at things like the fertility rate and the delay and decline of home ownership. What does this tell you? Is this really the picture you would expect from a generation who have it too easy? It seems to me that to get a start and accumulating wealth is just not as easy is it once was.
I’ll cite a few factors that worked against us :
– Asset price inflation waaaay ahead of wages , particulary property
– Continued casualisation of the workforce. Fewer “permanent” jobs – leads to higher risk for the same sized debt.
– Qualification inflation. Degrees etc, don’t carry as much weight as they used to. More qualifications are required to get the same job, and is cost the individual more to get that qualification. Means more years studying less time earning. More debt (hecs).I’m sure its tempting to to think that the reason for delayed or reduced accumultion of wealth is because of blowing our dosh on consumer electronics and cars with easy credit but think about it this way; you could buy a plasma TV, digital camera, ipod and DVD player and still have change for around out the cost of a SINGLE MONTHS mortgage repayment on a median house.
Personally I hate cars, consumer electronics and widgets. All my clothes and furniture come from op shops. I only buy food and undies new.
But still there just ain’t no dilapadated 2 bedroom weatherboard within commuting distance from work for us to get started on (and then get double digit growth for doing sweet FA). Not for under 6 or 8 times the median income…
Here’s the actual report…
In Victoria I understand that if you don’t register your bond with the RTBA you can be fined an amount comparable the the FHOG. Might want to think about that too…
I care..
Perhaps I am naiive, but I have always thought that a low cost of living was a good thing. I thought a low cost of living meant high wealth. Good for individuals and good for communites as a whole. I thought this was all fairly self evident.
So I was surpised to learn a few years ago, that not only there were people who thought rising house prices were a good thing, but that this was a very common, perhaps even a majority view. I learned that that the situation was often refrrred with terms such as “a heathly housing market”.
This has never made sense to me, because as far I could see, a high cost of housing benefitted very few people.
And the people for whom there is a benefit surely have friends, family, loved ones.. and children.. that clearly (to me anyway) are disadvantaged by this.
Housing, i.e. shelter, is an essential human need. I wonder if water, food or air became expensive, would people people also think that this is a good thing?
For what it’s worth…
use the ol compound interst formula:
p x i^n
p=principal
i=interest per year (or time period for which interest is calculated)
n=number of yearsSo in ten years the equivalent of 100k, assuming 2%pa change is:
100,000 x 1.02^10 = 121,899.44
[buz2]For what it’s worth…
use the ol compound interst formula:
p x i^n
p=principal
i=interest per year (or time period for which interest is calculated)
n=number of yearsSo in ten years the equivalent of 100k, assuming 2%pa change is:
100,000 x 1.02^10 = 121,899.44
[buz2]
