And some people like to buy their milk from 7/11 and not from Aldi. Personal choice.

Personally, I would buy a $60k 3 bedroom house in a major city in the US that is increasing in population. Rent that out for $1000pm. Have all the nessesary insurance, costing $1500 max per year.No risk. But that's what I've done and am doing now more than ever.

Consider purchasing a dispaly home from a developer that will be rented back the the developer for showcasing the estate. Lots of positives there.

bjsaust wrote:
So, the simple (but not so easy) solution is to buy positive geared property. Then it doesn't really matter, you make money anyway.

That is the only thing in your post that matters. The rest is as you say, is speculation.

The type of property is irrelevant.Property is only the vehicle. Look at the numbers, consider all the risks involved, ie: are you purchasing at market value or above/below? What’s the probability of price appreciation on the investment.Make a checklist of all the things you would want in the investment property like if its positive or n…[Read more]

Further to that, what if with your negative gearing strategy, you have a couple of negative properties and you lose your job. Unlikely, but in the off chance it happens. Then what? Risky stuff that negative gearing.Also, in 1987, lots of investors lost a lot of money and value in their properties when the US government decided to scrap negative…[Read more]

I'm not a fan of negative gearing. Using an old Kiyosaki example:If your after all your regular monthly expenses, your income is $1000 per month. How many $100 per month negatively geared properties could you purchase?10, right?Same scenario, $1000 income per month, how many positively geared properties could you purchase?If you answered, "as many…[Read more]