Best Political Party for Property Investors?

[Oynas]

Which Australian political party is best for property investors. I am thinking that property investors as a group should vote for parties that help property investors, e.g. ones that support negative gearing, increase immigration, aim for high employment, try to lower interest rates, etc.

Are the Liberals good? What about LDP? If we all vote in the same way instead of being fragmented, property investors can have a strong influence on politicians.

 

[willair]

If we all vote in the same way instead of being fragmented, property investors can have a strong influence on politicians.

That did not work last time ,but my guess is once "Kev From Queensland" starts on his first book,How to Aviod Crossing The Street Blindfolded" he will be in for the next 20 years..willlair..

 

[LynnH]

willair

Kev doesn't have time to write a book! He's too busy being Kevin-737, and flying around the globe trying to lobby for votes so he can become Secretary-General of the UN ..... when his job-sharing stint with Julia is over!

Cheers
Lynn

 

[Nathan]

Libs are better for the capitalist australians...

its more like libs are for landlords, labor is for tenants...

however with this labor gov, they are running around shooting bullets everywhere.... i think kev is a hybrid labor... but very much a muppet.

would have been a lot more comfortable seeing peter costello as PM at present, however i think he now understands he would be a very valuable asset to any corporate business (BHP etc) as their accountant and get paid 10x what big kev is on.

 

[roosterfan]

Don't listen to them Sir Kev...I know you are doing a good job!

 

[MarkB]

At the federal level I don't see much difference. No Australian Treasurer will repeat Keatings mid 80's **** up when he outlawed negative gearing. In terms of respective parties stances on marginal income tax rates - whether they cut taxes or raise them there are winners and losers (depending on how much the taxman contributes to your cashflow).


So I'm looking at the state level here and, ultimately, my vote is that labour is better for property investors.

For the single reason that state labour governments hate developers and tend to be anti-development.

Helps restrict supply -> opportunity for price or rent rises.

Dumbarses.

 

[our obsession]

Oynas:

If we all vote in the same way instead of being fragmented, property investors can have a strong influence on politicians.

Lobbying has been, and is one way, an effective way of bringing in new/ changing /ridding legislation and policy.

I've done a little myself.

I believe we maybe involved in, or seeking to become involved in property investing, but within that we are a diverse group of people, from different backgrounds, different personality/temperaments, life experiences, values, goals, hopes, priorities, you get the picture.

Kind of like religion, so many different groups, some maybe just spiritual, some atheist, some agnostic, all choices in life we get to hopefully make for ourselves.

I love that I am able to be involved in property, I enjoy the challenges it throws my way, problems and challenges are good for my creativity.

I have a heap of passions and loves and interests in life, property is only just one small part (addictive) of my life.

I also enjoy politics, I am a labor party supporter. I am the person I am, when I was active lobbying it was for aged care, elderly rights, humanitarian stuff. So on.

I wish you well on whatever you may lobby for, decide, but there is a strong possibility many of us in this world, not just property investors and forums, will not unify ....over many things.

You have and believe what is important to you, and that is your right, as do I have my choices, values and beliefs.

We all march to our different drummers. And that's a good thing really.

 

[stumunro]

imo theres plenty of other things more important for pollies to concentrate on...

we get it pretty good with tax incentives and I think the rulings on CGT & negative gearing are pretty fair towards us...

at the end of the day what is really important? there's plenty of opportunity out there to make money so my focus is on what i can do directly to better my investments, and ill vote for what's best for the country in more important aspects of life.

2cents

 

[buzzlightyear]

Given the convergence of economic policies between the major parties, I don't think you will find much difference at a Federal level.

Federal ALP made much song and dance of the affordable housing program, but in the words of an ex-ALP PM, "its merely embroidery on the fabric".....

State governments, whatever colour, seem to have a continuous co-dependent relationship with land & stamp duty taxes. I suspect land release may be the bigger issue going forward but I suspect that will be primarily a bi-partisan issue.

As for local governments, they are generally glorified school council committees.

 

[Chomp]

Libs are better for the capitalist australians...

its more like libs are for landlords, labor is for tenants...

however with this labor gov, they are running around shooting bullets everywhere.... i think kev is a hybrid labor... but very much a muppet.

would have been a lot more comfortable seeing peter costello as PM at present, however i think he now understands he would be a very valuable asset to any corporate business (BHP etc) as their accountant and get paid 10x what big kev is on.

I think Peter Costello will be back after we go through this downturn, I also think the Libs threw that election on purpose so costello would not be ousted when the economy turned bad.

or maybe I'm giving them too much credit

 

[Nathan]

I think Peter Costello will be back after we go through this downturn, I also think the Libs threw that election on purpose so costello would not be ousted when the economy turned bad.

or maybe I'm giving them too much credit

Chomp,

agree, i have a feeling he will do a john howard style manouver in the coming election in 11, where he will come back from the dead and be the knight in shining armour, and say ok il do it if i have to, and look like a hero.

i thought that from november 25th when he made the appearance day after election and stepped back, if he was in limelight now hed look desperate.

 

[mja]

If investors make up 7% of all Australians, then why would there be a political party aimed at 7% of the votes?

Sounds like a proposition doomed to fail to me.

 

[THEHEATH]

If investors make up 7% of all Australians, then why would there be a political party aimed at 7% of the votes?

Sounds like a proposition doomed to fail to me.

Well if your party is behind by 7% in the poles then you might just want to swing 7% of the people your way

 

[Y33]

How Keating became treasure is mind baffling. One expects that who ever is treasurer would have an excellent understandings of maths and finances but Keating's highest score in Maths during his final year was a C and he also failed Maths in his final end of year school exam (HSC).

Although negative gearing was removed and then reinstated maybe it makes better financial sense to remove it again. People should invest to make money not invest to lose money. Maybe the economy would not be in the situation it is now if investors were making money from their investments and not relying on equity and tax deductions. Personal debt would be less and rising interest rates would not have as great an effect on investors who are CF+ not CF-.

 

[MarkB]

If investors make up 7% of all Australians, then why would there be a political party aimed at 7% of the votes?

Sounds like a proposition doomed to fail to me.

7% of the votes in the Senate would put you in a very good place for possible balance of power.

How Keating became treasure is mind baffling.

I think you'll find that being Treasurer is more about political reward (for loyalty) or appeasement (in recognition of the power you wield) than actual ability at maths and economics.

 

[Y33]

Mark B,

You are absolutely right and that is the problem. One of my rellies was a former advisor to a few pollies and the frustration in his voice when he tried to explain things to Keating could easily be felt and heard.

 

[Peter Parker]

7% of the votes in the Senate would put you in a very good place for possible balance of power.

Where do I start - the idea's a crock.

It's a long way from assuming that as 7% of people are investors then 100% of them will vote for a party that claims to represent their interests.

For a start the vast majority of those 7% aren't serious investors, ie they might only have one IP.

Plus much of that 7%, serious or not, will have other things that determine their voting, eg how their parents voted, a non property cause, a particular philosophy etc.

Then there's the policies of the investors party itself. One would assume it would be a low taxing/small government type.

But if your tenants received centrelink pensions, you'd be overjoyed if a leftist government put them up, as they can afford to pay more rent to you! Similarly you wouldn't mind if they spent some of their high taxes on a new uni campus 1km from your IP. And even if they just put on more public servants then if you owned IPs in Canberra you'd be happy about that.

My guess is that the most successful investors tend to be politically agnostic and can identify an opportunity out of anything the government does (or doesn't) do. So for them there may be no one 'best' political party and they'll work with whoever is in power. And they're too busy making money to be handing out how to vote cards for a lost cause! Besides businessmen who enter politics are often failures or get impatient with the political process, eg John Elliot and Evan Thornley.

Now, if capitalism was under threat, eg the government wanted to nationalise the banks or abolish private property then it might have a chance. Otherwise not.

 

[MarkB]

Peter

It wasn't my idea Peter, so am not sure why you singled me out.

I was simply responding to the suggestion that a party with a potential 7% vote was "doomed to fail".

If a party based around IP investors were to poll around 7% in the Senate it would be powerful.

Whether it could poll that amount is another discussion.

There are some investors for whom their investing is their moral ethos - but I agree they are in the minority and for most people with IPs it is a side dish, not a mains.

M

 

[Token Funder]

*imagines tenant's forum having same discussion*

*does the numbers*

Ouch.

 

[Hooray]

Now, if capitalism was under threat, eg the government wanted to nationalise the banks or abolish private property then it might have a chance. Otherwise not.

(mutter in the background)

Northern Rock....... Royal Bank of Scotland.... AIG.... Fannie May..... Freddie Mac.... TARP....... Eminent Domain.......