sharetrader
Page 753 of 1608 FirstFirst ... 2536537037437497507517527537547557567577638038531253 ... LastLast
Results 7,521 to 7,530 of 16077
  1. #7521
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Christchurch, , France.
    Posts
    1,247

    Default

    Here for Sergeant Pepper is another article, with more temperate language. Notice the striking parallels with Andrew Little and NZ Labour.

    "
    If only politics wasn’t so brutally binary. What if there was room for a few shades of light and grey. In a less unforgiving world, it might have been Ed Miliband striding confidently up Downing Street, his wife by his side.


    But as Labour’s former leader never wasted an opportunity to remind us, our world does not forgive. It is harsh and cruel. It all too frequently fails to “reward those with the right values”.


    After the first leaders' debate, I was chatting to a few of the other journalists. We quickly reached a consensus. Miliband had “done all right”. Not as well as David Cameron. Nowhere near as well as new political uber-phenomenon Nicola Sturgeon. But “all right”.


    On Wednesday evening, after he had delivered his final election rally in Leeds, we assembled again. Our consensus? Not his best speech. But not his worst. He’d done “all right”.


    And over the course of the past five years that is basically how Ed Miliband’s leadership has come to be defined. All right. Not bad. Could be worse.

    It doesn’t look like that now, obviously. Not as we stand staring at the smouldering rubble of Labour’s election campaign. A Tory majority. More pandas in Edinburgh zoo than Labour MPs in Scotland. Ed Balls entering his count as if being led to the gallows. Which he was.

    And although some of us had our suspicions, until now it has not really been possible to directly tie Ed Miliband to such jarring calamity. His was the “one step forward, two steps back” leadership. A stumble here – forgetting the deficit, for example. A misstep there – the Falkirk selection scandal. And then suddenly a stride, or at least a tentative step, forward. New leadership election rules. A bold new policy on energy prices.

    And so gradually, he and his party began to suffocate beneath a blanket of relativism. His approval ratings were still bad. But not as bad as they had been. His speeches were still a bit clunky, and overly academic. But not as bad as they were in the early days. His media appearances were still a bit awkward. But not disastrous. Not bacon sandwich disastrous!

    And so Ed Miliband began to grow before our eyes. He was doing all right. Actually, you know what, he was doing quite well. Blimey, he was doing very well. OK, you’re not going to believe this, but Ed Miliband could actually be our prime minister.

    When I say “our eyes” I mean the media’s eyes. The eyes of his own activists. The eyes of some his own MPs.

    But there were other eyes watching him. From the very beginning, when he stood on that stage in Manchester and looked directly at his own brother and told him “David, I love you”. Straight after he’d killed him off.

    They were watching when he explained he had been too busy to get his own child’s name placed on a birth certificate. How he wanted to go and have chat with the student rioters. How he now had a blank piece of paper where his policies should be. How of course Labour didn’t spend too much. How trying to reform welfare was evil. How vicious those Tory toffs were, and how any decent person would instinctively want to show them the door.

    And they didn’t see what we saw – us professional Miliband watchers. Because for the voters it wasn’t a relative choice, it was an absolute choice.

    OK, he may not have been quite as bad as they thought he was. But he still wasn’t as good as the other guy. Yes, his speeches make a bit more sense these days. But not as much sense as the other guy’s. No, he didn’t look as weird as they’d first thought. But he still looked a lot weirder than the other guy.

    So they voted for the other guy. Because they could. They had a choice. And they’d always had a choice.

    This is what the suffocating comfort blanket of relativism finally did to Ed Miliband. It took him to the door of a crazy, ranting comedian in the dead of night. And we – the Miliwatchers – said to ourselves “Is that a good idea? I’m not sure. Looks a bit odd. But then again, it’s a bold play for the youth vote. If you look at the video with Brand ranting at him, Ed does OK”.

    And it took him to a photocall with a giant lump of rock. A lump of rock that he would be shoving in the back garden of Downing Street if he was elected prime minister, he announced. And again us Miliwatchers said “Hmmm. That looks a bit funny. Three days from polling day. But it does get his pledges in the papers. And the polls are looking quite good. So it isn’t that bad, really”.

    But it was. It was very, very bad. Not just the stone and the Russell Brand stuff. The whole Ed Miliband leadership stuff. Because the voters didn’t care about the faltering steps forward. The expect their prime minister to be able to step forward, that’s a given. It was the constant stumbling back that scared them.

    Ed Miliband has just made his resignation speech. It was all right. Actually, it was more than all right. It was excellent. But it was too late." Dan Hodges, The Telegraph.
    Last edited by Major von Tempsky; 09-05-2015 at 02:21 PM.

  2. #7522
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    962

    Default

    MVT, the Telegraph favours the Conservatives so is somewhat biased when it comes to Labour.
    I am still struggling with the relevance to NZ of an election result in the UK
    However W69 quoting the " Compass Group " who evidently proposed Labour should abolish the Royal Family and destroy all nuclear weapons has some connection as to why Labour is not in NZ attracting more support.
    Labour has been captured by minority activists, fringe groups who do not resonate with the ordinary person. With zero contracts, housing difficulties, etc there are plenty of issues to generate support
    but I am afraid unless Andrew Little can suppress the policies that are put forward by those with a narrow agenda and concentrate on the issues of importance to most of their traditional supporters John and his mob will be there in 2017

    westerly

  3. #7523
    Legend
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Sth Island. New Zealand.
    Posts
    6,428

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daytr View Post
    Sounds a bit like how the regions in NZ will react to National's neglect. The Northland by-election was a small & probably exaggerated insight into that.
    Unfortunately in my view the voting public of Auckland will allow Key to basically do anything he wants, as long as their property prices are going up.
    He can lie, tug ponytails & be surrounded by a bullying cabinet who over & over have shown complete disregard for the laws & conflicts of interest that the rest of us mere mortals are held to account for. This is the bribe that Key knows guarantee's his popularity. He will do nothing to hinder that & doesn't care what mess that eventually leads to in regards an eventual collapse. Reported this morning about people sleeping in their cars overnight to be first in line to be able to buy into a new subdivision. This isn't a rock concert, it was to buy a section!
    FFS, haven't you ever slept outside a shop all night to buy something in high demand? I certainly have and would think nothing of it to buy a section I wanted. What would you do about it? Shoot two thirds of the queue to lower demand?

  4. #7524
    Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    CNI area NZ
    Posts
    5,958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daytr View Post
    EZ, well actually he has stated why it needs to include the family home & its for two main reasons. 1) without including the family home its too easy to get around by putting property in partners or kids names etc. 2) If you chose to rent & had $500k in the bank rather than having it in a house, you get taxed on the interest. He sees the capital gain on the family home as the same.
    First, you have to consider that a CGT policy that includes the family home is almost certainly not a goer as any party's policy. In terms of costs not being claimed, it's also not fair. In that case, to protect a properly crafted CGT which is fair, at the point in time when someone sells an asset that might be subject to CGT, they will have to produce proof that they didn't claim any costs or interest in their tax returns while they held that asset. For normal homeowners this would just be a form signed by a JP, stating that they are the true owner of this asset and that it was held in the normal way. Just like R&D tax returns which this govt is so petrified about apparently, they were subject to an audit clause.

    Privately held homes, which are becoming a minority in NZ, could also be listed in a simple database against the IRD numbers of their owners. Maybe the IRD already have this data. If any person had more than one property in this section of a database, or if their spouse had another property listed, that would raise a flag. There is a mechanism which stops private people from claiming the interest and maintenance costs on their family home, against their normal taxes. That works, they don't file a return by themselves or through an agent, because they know it's illegal and they could get audited.

    When people do claim interest and costs in their tax returns, maybe they'd have to state for which properties it applies. That would be even easier to track down, when the assets are eventually sold. I guess this would mean that someone with enough cash could buy a rental property, rent it out for less than normal interest costs and not claim any expenses, to keep it under the radar. But it would be a poor investment generally, and at least the state hasn't been subsidising this investment for the many years it'll normally take to pay it off. Would this money be more likely to find its way into more productive investments - that's the whole aim.

  5. #7525
    Speedy Az winner69's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2001
    Location
    , , .
    Posts
    37,737

    Default

    EZ, hope you never have to write something like this but I fear you will in 2017.

    It's from somebody who calls themselves London Clay
    https://m.facebook.com/story.php?sto...33000846925298

    Messages in here for NZ Labour. Is a bit long but full of passion. Here it is -
    .


    Builders of the Future

    There have been better days, I suppose, than Friday, the 8th of May. But there ye go. Ye win some, ye lose some. Ye roll wae the punches, or something or other. You try and be upbeat, and realise, mibby you’re only down because your hopes were in the wrong place.

    I was guilty of hoping for too much I’d say, when the writing was on the wall. The writing, was actually all over Cricklewood, UKIP everywhere daubed in black marker pen, in crude letters on every bus shelter and billboard on the most cosmopolitan Broadway in the world.

    It didn’t make that much difference in Cricklewood, but everywhere in England and Wales the people spoke, and they spoke in a language the left did not understand, they spoke in a language that split the Labour vote, and everywhere allowed the decrepit Tories an encore, yet another last, demonic dance, in flames of labour movement history.

    I long ago turned off the histrionics when encountering UKIP voters, the histrionics that Labour has been particularly guilty of, Labour, our beloved, stale party of plutocrats. We’re out most days or nights, our cosmopolitan London railway civils gang, laying troughing for the plutocrats, their fibre optic cables, their rails for their trains. We don’t really use them ourselves, and in point of fact, our existence is almost wholly separate from theirs.

    Though they swarm around us everywhere in this London, their suits and their bicycles and their mystery jobs, and on shortcuts home to our boxrooms and council flats and mortgaged single-ends, through their leafy streets we see the posters in the bay windows of their Victorian four-bedroom semis: Vote Labour; Vote Conservative; read the Guardian, read the Mail, drive a Jeep, or take the train, pay for private tuition, for pilates, for personal trainers, nutritionists, clarinet lessons, au pairs. Left plutocrats, right plutocrats; like Steve Coogan and the Mansion Tax their politics is itself a lifestyle choice.

    And elsewhere, not so visible, there’s the Green voters, the broad left, and they’re enough of them here, the folk like me, the graduate types in working class jobs or working class salaries, the boxroom crew, the folk who talk about cosmopolitanism, or multiculturalism even, like it’s a reason to live in London, like work, or opportunity, this is what marks them out. They are the folk who, even if they don’t have the choice that the plutocrats do, well they’ve been reared on believing they do.

    And elsewhere still, you can see the housing estates still come out for Labour, for the ghost of Labour past, the throngs of folk, young and old, a 7pm rush on the polling booths, mostly in London, you have to say, the folk who are less white on the whole. But then still the bulk of the voting, working class, here and across England, and Wales. The bulk though, that as the years go by, looks more and more the rump.

    I turned off the histrionics a long time ago, the outrage you’re told to feel when you meet a UKIP voter, I turned it off when I realised I’d to work with them, live with them, join with them and recruit them. I think I saw it then, the writing on the wall in its crude letters, though I didn’t want to believe it at the time, the ghostly hand, in the midnight darkness of the trades hall.

    The gang was disinclined to vote Labour. And Michael King says he voted UKIP, his soft Connemara accent, The immigration, it’s fúcked. I’m gettin the same (hourly) rate I got, fifteen years ago, and you know, I’m only workin three days now.

    And Cedric the Jamaican chimes in Truss, he don vote in na bladclart Babylan, but dem Eas Europeans, dem f****in it all up, for like his Irish brother, he is a plasterer to trade, reduced again in his middle age to pick and shovel.

    And behind it all, the spectre whose same ghostly hand is doing all the writing, the spectre of Capital itself, it looms over us all, on this year, the busiest on the Project, this biggest building site in Great Europe.

    Our wages stable now, Capital cannot find enough of us to build and refurbish the great new stations it requires to facilitate its City and her plutocrats of left and right.

    So Capital in its freedom of movement relies again on the freedom of movement of labour, and once again to the Continent goes its gnarled and knuckled digits and from thence it plucks new gangs of toilers, Magyars, Slovaks, Romanians, new souls to sleep and dream in London boxrooms of better worlds.

    And Paddy and Jamaican know as well as Jock how well it’s all going back in Hungary, how cozy those boxrooms may have grown on our brothers by such time as they’ve slapped the last tile on Tottenham Court Road, how this time next year, when they’re all out of work, wages will plummet again, and the tormented mind of every power-giddy gaffer will make gleeful threats anew, the army of surplus labour at his beck and call.

    His cruel and wrinkled hand, it waves its finger softly at me, I protest: It’s the law that hammers our wages, the law that says we can’t strike without a ballot, without a month’s notice, the law that let’s them employ us like this, contracts they can terminate, not people they can sack… It’s the law, it stops us organising, and so the finger waves softly, in the grim glower of the Jamaican’s eye, the man too scared to join the union.

    In Erwägung unserer Schwäche machtet, etc… Knowing we are weak you make new laws, says Brecht, Laws to keep us weak and make you strong. Knowing our fear, intimately, with the studied contempt of centuries, understanding we your serfs and our hatred of the plutocracy, better than Labour, we become the victims of Tory chicanery, of this ancient party of governance and experience.

    We English and Welsh toilers, we vote in our millions for UKIP, the only party that speaks to our hearts, itself an establishment plot, as if UKIP is not as wedded to the low wage economy, as if UKIP will not just replace European labour with Commonwealth labour, as if UKIP will reform labour law, and not reinforce it.

    And we split so the Labour vote, a masterstroke of Tory strategy, a victory for them all the more complete in that we do not care, anymore, for we decided, continues Brecht, henceforth to fear our poor lives more than death, we were incapable of going on in the old way.

    And Miliband, less perfectly contemptible in his ignorance of his electorate only perhaps than Gordon Brown, Miliband vanishes a cloud of nothing, but complains for the last that Labour has fallen victim: to Nationalism. It is all he has to say, all we need to hear.

    Diane Abbott says fair enough, things are bad for Labour in Scotland, but Gordon, he could save it for us, like he did the Referendum… So we overturn Brown’s old seat, with a 35% swing, this hero of the Labour soft left, we humiliate him forever, we rub his sagging face in the mud. They tell us Wullie Bain’s seat is the safest Labour seat in Scotland. We turn it into the biggest swing, we break all records, as if the limits of our spite, our vengeance, were bound only by the extent of our democracy.

    This is what we think of the City of London and her plutocracy, her gravy train, and they make it easier to hate them so, for their only answer is to call us Nationalists, xenophobes, the same language on both sides the border, whatever the difference in politics. For we are fighting for our immediate class interests, and they for theirs.

    In Scotland, we look to the immediate source of their sustenance and our misery: oil, the oil that props up their City and Pound, parasitic finance capital and its bleeding of the North. We launch an historic fight to control it. In England again, we look to the immediate source of their sustenance and our misery: the unelectable, the unaccountable European Union, the architecture of the low wage economy.

    We vote on either side the border for very different parties, for in our rudderlessness, without our own leaders, we are the formless, surface clay in the hands of the right, we vote UKIP in our millions, we let the Tories in. Labour, party of left plutocrats, incapable of understanding us, their class enemy, Labour can understand this only as Nationalism, and in all constituent parts of the UK, turns in response to its identitarian right.

    And yet this was the moment of our quiet, but terrible, working class radicalism. This was in England the milder form of what happened in Scotland, the less enthusiastic form, for the great visionaries of our movement were, in England, elsewhere. Not fanning its flames, not directing its fire, but gone the same distant way as the Labour leadership, squeaking at us the same curses bellowed by Miliband and Brown: Nationalists; xenophobes.

    Mene, Mene, Teqel, Upharsin. They couldn’t see the writing on the wall, we couldn’t even understand the language it was written in, nor that the wall was no mouldy edifice of some ancient labour club, but the rheumy, cold stone of Belshazzar’s Palace itself.

    For the great visionaries of our movement, the socialists, the proselytisers, if not already part of the plutocracy themselves, then they were there, waiting on its left wing. They hang around with Green voters, and avoid UKIP voters. They steer clear of the workers, the workers, with their terrible politics and terrible vengeance, their backwardness that marches arm in arm with their thunderous, relentless, unconscious drive to transform the world for the better. The toilers, the folk without a choice nor the illusion of one, the only secure foundation upon which a free nation can be built.

    They weep then, the visionaries, the socialists, they wail in their ignorance, cast out in the cold from labour hall and Palace alike, they beat their breasts and grind their teeth, trying to understand why the Tories got in: blame the Scots, blame the English, blame everyone but yourselves, who deserted your people.

    But they can, and will, dispense with their histrionics, the left. You can, you will, emerge from your ghettos, the safe spaces you carve for yourselves away from a class that is alien to you, that you have grown to hate, and that hates you back.

    You will come forth, and you will change. What is behind, you will leave behind you. I have every faith in that, you pioneers, you navigators, you builders of the future.

    Because if you don’t, you know you will hold us back, drag us back, smother us, kill us. You know your ghettos are more pervasively reactionary a social force even than those less sophisticated ghettos of the right.

    But no, these questions are not even worth considering. An iron certainty you will turn your cowering subculture, into an aggressive counterculture, an infrastructure for a labour movement reborn. A movement not of grey discussion circles on campuses or upstairs in pubs or content in toothless public sector trade unions.

    But a movement, rather, of boxing clubs and football clubs, of community centres, of organisations of the unemployed, of adhoc libraries, food banks and cafés and club nights. A movement that brands the new class identity with the name of socialism, that takes those folk, those Green voters, those UKIP voters, those Labour voters, that forges them anew, a mighty weapon, with the stark, sure creed of a knife.

    For the working class are your people, and you are their conscience. We are flesh and blood, together, and our flesh and blood tears iron from concrete from clay. Our terrible, our gruesome power for change, our capacity to act as one, it was everywhere visible in this election, only used against us this time by our ancient nemesis with a cunning of ages. Next time, next time we will see.

    70 years ago today, my ould man threw his uniform into the sea at Durban, and looked out on the Indian Ocean of peacetime thick with ships, a war survived, a future to be built, a Welfare State to be forged on the vengeful, suspicious hopes of those thousands of servicemen and women returned to Britain and battle trained.

    My colleague Sacha alongside me, the Romanian railway chippy, we send a video, by way of apology, to a meeting neither of us are able to attend, an humble gathering last night to commemorate that great victory against Fascism.

    70 years ago today, Sacha’s grandfather, the Georgian Red Army man a chippy with a gun, gazed out over the serene ruins of Berlin still smoking. He gazed out and wondered on the accident that was his life, that brought him here this bright May morning in dark clouds of mortal smoke, through thousands of miles of blood and **** and snotters and bits of women and men and weans and dogs.

    Barely a bird left alive to whistle, so a sparrow came and stood a while beside him, and as he looked back before him, he saw not ruins, but foundations. By his side a gun, his hand reached not for grenade nor bayonet, but for his hammer, for wire and nips.

    We are still here, us folk, still our parents and grandparents, just with different faces, all their histories, all their wisdom, all their experience combined in ours. The Internet, the Great Library of Alexandria at the fingertips of every child with a half decent phone, shines a Morning Star of enlightenment unstoppable in its implications. We have fought through worse, we have built from less, there have been worse days than Friday, the 8th of May, and there will be better.

    There will come a day when we will drop our standard over the ruined Reichstags of the past, of Belshazzar’s Palace, of Berlins and Babylons and Londons. Our power, our thunderous, our clamorous power, is everywhere to be seen.

  6. #7526
    ****
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    NZ
    Posts
    4,478

    Default

    All I'm doing is highlighting how ridiculous the Auckland property market is getting. These sort of stunts are just a reflection of the bubble that will eventually burst. Lets see what Key's popularity does if it indeed bursts while he's still PM.

    EZ, why its not fair? I think what Morgan proposes is very fair & the idea is that it could make housing more affordable. The reason it includes the family home is that CGTs when implemented overseas have too many loopholes & to structure it as you say without including the family home makes it far to complex.

    Quote Originally Posted by fungus pudding View Post
    FFS, haven't you ever slept outside a shop all night to buy something in high demand? I certainly have and would think nothing of it to buy a section I wanted. What would you do about it? Shoot two thirds of the queue to lower demand?
    Last edited by Daytr; 10-05-2015 at 09:09 PM.
    Hopefully you find my posts helpful, but in no way should they be construed as advice. Make your own decision.

  7. #7527
    Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    CNI area NZ
    Posts
    5,958

    Default

    Thanks for posting that W69. It's very powerful writing, has only just gone up on facebook. Some comments that follow are also good. It's a long road ahead.

  8. #7528
    Advanced Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Wellington, , New Zealand.
    Posts
    1,701

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daytr View Post
    All I'm doing is highlighting how ridiculous he Auckland property market is getting. These sort of stunts are just a reflection of the bubble that will eventually burst. Lets see what Key's popularity does if it indeed bursts when he's still PM.

    EZ, why its not fair, I think what Morgan proposes is very fair & the idea is that it could make housing more affordable. The reason it includes the family home is that CGTs when implemented overseas have too many loopholes & to structure it as you say without including the family home makes it far to complex.
    Is it still a bubble if it goes out with a whimper rather than a bang? A quiet deflating over time rather than a loud and sudden burst? (Not everyone agrees it is a bubble of course - time will tell.)

    Do you think Dr Morgan's idea will be adopted as policy by any party before the next election?

  9. #7529
    always learning ... BlackPeter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    9,497

    Default

    I hear properties in Westport are dead cheap these days. Nice climate, great outdoors - no jobs.

    So I guess there are only 2 ways to deal with the Auckland property boom: Increase supply (i.e. build more sustainable houses - i.e. apartments, like everywhere else on this planet) or reduce demand (i.e. by shifting jobs to other places). Adding taxes (even if that's what the Left demands, because that's what they do best) has a lot of negative side effects, but does nothing to cure the disease.

    A CGT would do absolutely nothing for the Auckland housing supply or demand, and it wouldn't even increase the government's revenues. Given that property prices (in some parts of the country) are already inflated and given that you can't tax retrospectively would a CGT introduced now just mean that all these greedy speculators who buy houses at inflated prices now could (when the bubble bursts) deduct all their losses from their tax bill. Bugger.

    This means our society would lose at least twice - we would first need to invest into an additional huge bureaucratic overhead (thousands of additional IRD staff, building assessors, lawyers) to assess the current commercial value of every single building in NZ and to administer the proposed new tax system - and the outcome of their hard work would be that government likely has to refund all these inevitable tax losses to the tax payer. Lose - lose.

    What about floating some constructive proposals instead?
    ----
    "Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future" (Niels Bohr)

  10. #7530
    Legend
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    CNI area NZ
    Posts
    5,958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BlackPeter View Post
    I hear properties in Westport are dead cheap these days. Nice climate, great outdoors - no jobs.

    So I guess there are only 2 ways to deal with the Auckland property boom: Increase supply (i.e. build more sustainable houses - i.e. apartments, like everywhere else on this planet) or reduce demand (i.e. by shifting jobs to other places). Adding taxes (even if that's what the Left demands, because that's what they do best) has a lot of negative side effects, but does nothing to cure the disease.

    A CGT would do absolutely nothing for the Auckland housing supply or demand, and it wouldn't even increase the government's revenues. Given that property prices (in some parts of the country) are already inflated and given that you can't tax retrospectively would a CGT introduced now just mean that all these greedy speculators who buy houses at inflated prices now could (when the bubble bursts) deduct all their losses from their tax bill. Bugger.

    This means our society would lose at least twice - we would first need to invest into an additional huge bureaucratic overhead (thousands of additional IRD staff, building assessors, lawyers) to assess the current commercial value of every single building in NZ and to administer the proposed new tax system - and the outcome of their hard work would be that government likely has to refund all these inevitable tax losses to the tax payer. Lose - lose.

    What about floating some constructive proposals instead?
    Well, it is true that the Labour govt had no trouble balancing its books for 9 years in a row, without a CGT. We could leave everything in place as it is, but have a sensible tax rate on higher earners, and maybe it would be better to encourage capital into more productive assets than farms, commercial buildings and rental property. But if nothing else, the CGT discussion has proved that the current tax process is unfair for those without asset backing.

    I still remember feeling guilty about claiming costs and interest on my commercial building while I was paying it off, and still trading from it. Surely it wasn't this easy? If a CGT came in now, I'd only pay a tax on appreciation from the start date. It has already saved me a lot of overheads (rent) and offset income taxes. To expect a capital gain with no tax later on, is surely cheeky to everyone who pays PAYE on their wages. Yes, the Aussie CGT looks messy. We could design a better one.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •