Haves and have nots

[Kennethkohsg]

The renter has this choice: rental house vs cardboard box/tent/caravan park

Peter

+++++++++++++++++
Hiya Peter,

1. How's about sleeping in a car as another choice for renters?

2. I recall reading a recent report about a family found sleeping in their car in Perth because they could not afford to pay for the rising rents of "renting" a house to stay, for their family.

3. Thank you.

Cheers,
Kenneth KOH

 

[lowb]

If we look for the reason behind why the have nots dont like the haves, and why the have nots are not haves... then in my opinion it comes to the age old factors of

//problems...
//

Problem 1. greed
-desire money and think that money is happiness
-lack of gratitude with what they can have (FHOG can surely live in other suburbs or further away from CBD)

Problem 2. fear
-fear of choosing to act (lack of guts)
-fear because they do not know how to become haves (lack of knowledge)
-other fears including lack of confidence, fearing other's opinions

This is what I have felt, and the solutions I have found are

//solutions
//

Soln.1 to greed
-appreciate what i have now, there will always be people better off than you and worse off than you; if you can be happy now then thats enough
-learn what money is: nothing is about money (but i cant explain this well enough), we dont own money we mearly control it (still working on understanding this)

Soln.2 to fear
-learn more about building wealth / lifestyle / saving / rich mentality from books and this forum!
-be confident, have faith in decades of knowledge (e.g. if property has risen avg. 10% p.a. for 100 years, you need to have trust to make your purchase)

//implications
//

implication1. to greed
-content with what you can buy now, acknowledge that in the future you can afford better
-prices will always rise and there are always things we cannot buy but that doesnt have to frustrate you

implications2. to fear
-investors are just normal people who have chosen to live life with wealth and you can too (a certain lifestyle)
-with the right knowledge, you can buy whatever you want but you just need a plan! if you ask people in the forum, giving approx income/savings/circumstances, you can reach the goal of buying your house in whatever suburb in many small steps
-if there were no challenges in life, wouldnt life be a bit boring? imagine what life would be like if you just worked for one year, bought the house of your dreams, what would drive people to strive to be better or to achieve more?

These are just of my personal interpretations on wealth/life, but in terms of IPs I'm just a starter...
-cheers

 

[Lucyinthesky]

I find that most of our friends who will be have-nots with another interest rate rise, tend to be out shopping most of the time and a common topic of conversation is "I just went out and bought a plasma, I just went out and bought a 4wd, I just went out and bought a mother of a BBQ with a kitchen sink"...etc. The most common saying I hear lately is "Well you only live once!"
We know many people who have lost their only assets or are now in the process.

 

[rj]

I recall reading a recent report about a family found sleeping in their car in Perth because they could not afford to pay for the rising rents of "renting" a house to stay, for their family.

Yeah, but I bet they had cigarettes and alcohol.

RJ

 

[our obsession]

The Table of Life and Herbie Hancock..

Respecting the fundamental rights, dignity and worth of all people.

http://www.sgi.org/english/Features/quarterly/0104/feature1.htm

 

[mja]

Of course the gap is widening. And unfortunately it's the haves who are taking from the have nots. For every IP that an investor buys, that's another potential PPOR that is taken out of the market.

I disagree.

There's more than enough for everyone, if everyone would just open themselves up to it. This includes the pool of properties available for purchase as a PPOR.

Since everyone has unlimited potential, then everyone has the capability of owning their own PPOR.

There will always be those who rent who complain that they can't afford to own their own home because that's their reality. If they shift their reality, then the impossible becomes possible.

I'll get off my soap box now.

-- MJ.

 

[Timmy]

I'm not here to tell anyone what to do. I'm simply trying to come up with some different ideas/thoughts/theories in comparison to how most people here view property investment.

I think it's great that you are all taking your financial matters into your own hands. But what I'm saying is that it's not necessarily a bad thing for people not to invest in property, shares, businesses etc.

I stand by every comment I have made. And I know a few of them have been a little "impolite", but that gets people thinking.

Think about cause and effect, or action and reaction. For every action you take (whether it be buying a house, or a car, or a plasma TV) it has an effect on somebody. Be aware of these effects, rather than blindly buying IP's like crazy with no regard for anything but your own financial statement.

I will say this again (because people don't seem to understand). If you buy an IP, that property that you purchased cannot be a PPOR for somebody. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, that's up to you to decide. But if you're going to start threads about the number of people who have to rent these days, think about some of the reasons that may be occurring. There are lots of reasons, and I only touched on a couple.

And thankyou geoffw for reminding me of one of my earlier posts. The arrogance of this forum is breathtaking. The way you look down on people with less money than yourselves is sad. I know a lot of these people "do nothing to help themselves", but this only seems to give you more ammunition to attack these people. Each and every one of you seems to be able to justify the fact that "these people" "have what they deserve". And that fact is, some people don't have what they deserve.

Let me suggest something.....I think that wealth is a comparitive term. Nobody by themselves is rich or wealthy. It takes other people who are poorer than you to be rich. There have been studies that show people would rather earn $70k per year when all their friends are earning $50k per year, than earn $100k per year when all their friends are earning $120k per year. When we look at somebody who is "wealthy", we compare them with somebody who is poorer. When we look at someone who is "poor", we also compare them with somebody who is richer. How many billion people on our planet live on less than $1 a week? I think it's 2 or 3 billion. And I'm sure these people would look at the "poor" of Australia and say that these people are rich.

So what's the point of this? Be very careful how "rich" you want to be, or perhaps how "poor" you want others to be.

Money always goes somewhere, if you don't have it, chances are someone else has it.

 

[gooram]

Timmy, Timmy, Timmy... you haven't listened to a word that's been said.

Think about cause and effect, or action and reaction. For every action you take (whether it be buying a house, or a car, or a plasma TV) it has an effect on somebody. Be aware of these effects, rather than blindly buying IP's like crazy with no regard for anything but your own financial statement.

What percentage of property investors would you say are "blindly buying IPs like crazy"?

I will say this again (because people don't seem to understand). If you buy an IP, that property that you purchased cannot be a PPOR for somebody. Whether that's a good thing or a bad thing, that's up to you to decide. But if you're going to start threads about the number of people who have to rent these days, think about some of the reasons that may be occurring. There are lots of reasons, and I only touched on a couple.

It's been mentioned a couple of times, historical owners vs renters figures have not changed recently. So what do you base this on?

And thankyou geoffw for reminding me of one of my earlier posts. The arrogance of this forum is breathtaking.
The way you look down on people with less money than yourselves is sad. I know a lot of these people "do nothing to help themselves", but this only seems to give you more ammunition to attack these people. Each and every one of you seems to be able to justify the fact that "these people" "have what they deserve". And that fact is, some people don't have what they deserve.

Breathtaking?!?! The language you use timmy is quite sensationalist, reminds me of email spam. This statement is consistent with your others so far in this thread, not based on fact.

Let me suggest something.....I think that wealth is a comparitive term. Nobody by themselves is rich or wealthy. It takes other people who are poorer than you to be rich. There have been studies that show people would rather earn $70k per year when all their friends are earning $50k per year, than earn $100k per year when all their friends are earning $120k per year. When we look at somebody who is "wealthy", we compare them with somebody who is poorer. When we look at someone who is "poor", we also compare them with somebody who is richer. How many billion people on our planet live on less than $1 a week? I think it's 2 or 3 billion. And I'm sure these people would look at the "poor" of Australia and say that these people are rich.

And they absolutely are! There is no reason for anyone in australia to complain about anything. It is truely a lucky country. Take a trip to africa, or india and regardless of your situation you will have a greater appreciation for what you have here.

So what's the point of this? Be very careful how "rich" you want to be, or perhaps how "poor" you want others to be.

Money always goes somewhere, if you don't have it, chances are someone else has it.

This is not a very clear point. Can you maybe explain what you mean by this.

 

[coastymike]

Can't say I've seen any accounts for a GP earning over $1M per annum. As See Change says possibly in the country.

Even if you were seeing a patient every 10 minutes at $50 per consult that would equate to $3,000 per day. Even if you worked 6 days per week 52 weeks of the year it only comes to $936,000. And I haven't seen any doctors with a throughput of 60 patients a day every day of the week every day of the year.

If she is great but I'd love to know how. Possibly the only GP in Australia with those sort of figures. As SeeChange says I usually see around the $500-$700K mark.

If she manages a practice and has other doctors working for her and they pay 50-60% to the practice then it's very possible. I have a few clients earning well over the $1M mark with locums, etc. Just not possible on your own. Leveraging is the key. Same as in most investments.

 

[lizzie]

And thankyou geoffw for reminding me of one of my earlier posts. The arrogance of this forum is breathtaking. The way you look down on people with less money than yourselves is sad. I know a lot of these people "do nothing to help themselves", but this only seems to give you more ammunition to attack these people. Each and every one of you seems to be able to justify the fact that "these people" "have what they deserve".

timmy - there is a big difference between arrogance towards people who have less (which i believe there is very little of such on this forum) and being blamed - by the likes of yourself - for them being in their situation.

re-read the posts on this thread. not much of what you are claiming as "fact" is standing up. just because we refuse to be dragged down to the level of the have-nots, or don't feel sorry for them if they are the instigators of their own situation but refuse to see this, doesn't mean we are arrogant.

it means we are realistic, proud of what we have achieved through our own sweat and sacrifice (as many of us have come from very poor or unsupported situations) and don't take to kindly to newbie's arriving on the scene to sling muck at us.

once again - please answer - what is your investing goal and what are you doing to achieve such so that you are not relying on the government (ergo: us) to pay your way in the future?

 

[dave99]

***********************
Dear Dave99,

1. I agree with you that how can/do we talk about the "rich" without the "poors";- after all, they are actually 2 different sides on the same coin.

2. However, some times in life we have to make a choice and decide for ourselves: "where would I rather be in my own life?:- to be rich or to be poor?"

3. To each his/her own and may he/she be happy and contented with his/her own life decision and able to be responsible enough to live out one's life decision and bear the full consequences of the decision whatsoever the outcome of the life decision may be.

4. Now, each game has its basic game rule.

5. The basic game rule in Capitalism is to make as much money as one can, and not one which is right or wrong, fair or unfair, as AlexLee will probably tell you.

6. In Socialism, we speak about the social equality and its inequalities, fairness vs unfairness while in both religions and ethics, we talk about
"right" and "wrong" to do/not to do certain things.

7. So, I am wondering what is the actual "game" which we are talking here? or rather which Timmy is actually referring to, in this property investing forum, in the first place?

8. Thank you.

Cheers,
Kenneth KOH

Hi Kenneth,

I do agree with you and Alex that we make our own choices. With respect to property investment, the viability of our choice to invest depends on others continuing to rent. This is why it disturbs me that people are so angry or cruel on this forum to the "have nots" who rent.

You said that the basic rule in capitalism is to make maximum wealth, while socialism is concerned with right and wrong. I think this is totally untrue. Capitalism has its own ethical system. The quickest way to make money in real estate would be to sell a non-existent property in a false name, and take the deposit. Repeat as necessary. The ethics of capitalism prohibits this, because it is fraud - a moral judgement.

My point is, there are ethics in capitalism, so how are they determined and to whose benefit in society? And, are they changing? I would be very interested in your opinion on this.

Cheers - Dave99

 

[Andrew_A]

I don't see why anyone has anything to complain about in Australia presently from a purely material point of view relative to the past. Can a student of history explain to me when there has been a better time materially speaking in this country? Please as I will learn something new.

 

[lizzie]

This is why it disturbs me that people are so angry or cruel on this forum to the "have nots" who rent.

dave - i don't think anyone here is cruel or angry at the "have nots". we just get frustrated at the "have nots" who blame the "haves" for the situation they are in, or they cry "woe is me" when they have bought the situation upon themselves.

i am not generalising. to use a couple of examples of what we mean ... i have a good friend who is most area we get along, but she is very consumer-driven. she recently bought a new double door fridge and double door dishwasher because she "wanted" them. the old ones were only two years old but i wasn't quick enough to snaffle them for myself. my dishwasher is 10yr old and the fridge pushing 16. i don't have a problem with that but when she constantly complains about how tight money is and they are struggling with the mortgage payments i say nothing - and while complaining they bought a new "huge" plasma tv, designer leather lounge, top brand kingsize bed.

another friend scored herself a 6month old dishwasher from one of her clients. apparently the pump didn't work so she gave it away and bought herself a new one. my friend clean all the junk out of the pump (the client never scraped the plates cleanish) and now has a practically new dishwasher. apparently this is not an uncommon trend of this middle aged client who has no assests asides from the ppor with a mortgage but complains about having to work 2 jobs.

another associate invested huge amount of money in a trendy-for-a-second beachside village during the peak of the boom, was forced to sell for a substantial loss and now is always complaining they have no money - but always seem to be going out to dinner, concerts, travelling, her new baby has the best of everything and drives around in a flash car.

i also supermarket shop in a lower socio area as i found it cheaper but the quality better - the queue at the ciggie counter is usually out the door yet the trailling kids often look half starved and not very clean.

i can use other examples if you wish - it is not arrogance or cruelty ... just don't complain about the situation if you bought it upon yourself.

now - enough of focusing on the negative. i am here to learn more about becoming financially free ....

 

[sailor]

Reading through this thread, just makes me realise how fortunate I am, and grateful I am for what I have.

I have a variety of "haves" and "have nots" in my life. Most of them I really like, especially the "haves" who are generous of heart and time...seems like good things flow to them. On the other hand the "have nots" seem to have what I call a "poverty mentality", regardless of their expensive chattles. Most of the G of H, are hard workers who value the people in their lives, whereas most with a "poverty mentality", seem to begrudge or envy those with wealth.

For the "have nots" to become the G of H, they would have to make quite a mind shift to change their attitudes about themselves. This would not be easy for them, as they have a vested interest in staying the way they are, perhaps out of fear. Fear that they would not succeed, fear of failing, fear of risk, etc.

Most of the "have nots" I know say they can't afford to own their own property; because:

a. they don't have a job, and won't get a job that entails work which is "beneath their dignity".
b. have a job and don't save. (I say don't because they can afford expensive chattles and new cars.)
c. have a job and live the high life.
d. don't believe they could get a home loan, but haven't even tried.

Just my thoughts...

 

[lizzie]

i also supermarket shop in a lower socio area as i found it cheaper but the quality better - the queue at the ciggie counter is usually out the door yet the trailling kids often look half starved and not very clean.

to continue the above analogy and using timmy's logic ...

by my choosing to purchase fruit and veges instead of cig's, i am apparently pushing up demand, therefore the price and taking produce out of circulation - therefore i am apparently denying those that choose the cigarette and cola the possibility of buying the fruit and vege ... that logic doesn't make sense to me.

i agree fully with salior - those that i know who have (but still have the old tv, no dishwasher etc) never mention their wealth/freedom, are happier people who give of their time to others and seem to have a positive view of the world. whereas those i know who have not (but have the expensive accessories) seem always to be complaining about their lack of wealth/freedom and give to themselves first.

i know what type of person i'd rather be.

 

[flatout]

Reading through this thread, just makes me realise how fortunate I am, and grateful I am for what I have.

I have a variety of "haves" and "have nots" in my life. Most of them I really like, especially the "haves" who are generous of heart and time...seems like good things flow to them. On the other hand the "have nots" seem to have what I call a "poverty mentality", regardless of their expensive chattles. Most of the G of H, are hard workers who value the people in their lives, whereas most with a "poverty mentality", seem to begrudge or envy those with wealth.

For the "have nots" to become the G of H, they would have to make quite a mind shift to change their attitudes about themselves. This would not be easy for them, as they have a vested interest in staying the way they are, perhaps out of fear. Fear that they would not succeed, fear of failing, fear of risk, etc.

Sailor,

I see these exact same things among our circle of family and friends. I'm still upset over a recent comment made by a family member that "money changes people ..." The comment was clearly directed at hubby and I and was rather out of place - almost like they'd been waiting for an opportunity to say it. The relationship between us has been rather tense over the last year or two since we've been able to enjoy some of the financial rewards from our investing. It also coincides with some bad decisions on their part that have seen their financial position decline. I think the only changes that money has made here is that there is a growing resentment of our success.

The worst part is we tried to get them into property investing at the same time we got back into it...hubby (a tax accountant) did all the sums for them, we shared our research, even looked at a few properties together but in the end they just couldn't/wouldn't see the big picture and flatly refused to have a go. For months afterwards they made snide comments about having better things to do with their time than attending to maintenance issues on a IP, being a slave to a mortgage etc etc. They have plenty of disposable income but are always at the shops, going to concerts or dining out - even to a point of paying premium rent on a place because it is within walking distance to the cafe strip. Finally now I think it is just dawning on them that our willingness to give up some disposable income now has us firmly on track for financial freedom and early retirement. Meanwhile their unwillingness to do the same will see them shackled to the "9 to 5" for another 20 years at least.

Flatout

 

[Bandita]

Hi Timmy,

I think I see what you're getting at - but I think you're directing it at the wrong group. I don't see anyone here looking down at people with less money - in fact, they are some of the stingiest people I've seen! Most of the people on this forum recommend those looking at getting into investing to rent rather than buy their own home. We rent ourselves. And I've never been looked down for it - in fact, most people are inspired by it. I certainly don't, and this forum doesn't, look down at those who rent or who have less funds - I just can't see that point of yours. Yes, they do question those who choose to spend ridiculous amounts on new cars, plasma tvs, other gadgets - and then complain that housing isn't affordable - but these are certaintly not the "have nots". They, whether they like to admit it or not - are the "choose nots" - very different category.

I understand your point about buying IP's meaning one less home for a PPOR for someone - but I can guarantee you, the areas we're looking at - it's the home owners who are pushing up the prices - not the investors. Hence why I hate bidding at auctions - it's almost always against home buyers who, because of their emotional value in the property, will push up the price far greater than we'd be willing to pay. There are absolutely no "bargains" at auctions in this part of town - and that isn't due to investors. I believe, of the past 25 auctions I've been to - only one I've seen put up for rent. Our main goal is to push the price down - meaning it's even more affordable for a PPOR buyer.

I also agree strongly with Gooram! What an amazing country! I get Medicare (everyone does?!? ) - wow!!! Seriously - none of my friends/family from the USA can believe it! And 4 weeks holiday - amazing!! (Plus sick days - what?!? ) FHOG - yippee!! $6k Baby bonus - are you serious - they give you money to have kids?!? The Dole - well, lets just say that word had never entered my vocab until I came here! Such benefits certainly are not available to all in the USA ('the land of opportunity') - in fact, I don't know a single person who even gets even one of them (from $6/hr low income to $100k/yr high income). It's incredible!

Cheers,
Jen

 

[Chilli]

I also agree strongly with Gooram! What an amazing country! I get Medicare (everyone does?!? ) - wow!!! Seriously - none of my friends/family from the USA can believe it! And 4 weeks holiday - amazing!! (Plus sick days - what?!? ) FHOG - yippee!! $6k Baby bonus - are you serious - they give you money to have kids?!? The Dole - well, lets just say that word had never entered my vocab until I came here! Such benefits certainly are not available to all in the USA ('the land of opportunity') - in fact, I don't know a single person who even gets even one of them (from $6/hr low income to $100k/yr high income). It's incredible!

Hi JenD,
Thank you for reminding me what a wonderful country Aus is. I will start the day with that positive thought in mind.
Timmy, no one could be more "have-not" than I was when I first got to Aus, no home no relatives no money no speaking English. I can say I am one of "the-haves" now, all because of my choice. I get very anoyed when hearing people crying poor in this country. Don't want to repeat what others have already said, I agree with lizzie and the likes.

 

[Kennethkohsg]

Hi Kenneth,

This is why it disturbs me that people are so angry or cruel on this forum to the "have nots" who rent.

Cheers - Dave99

*****************************
Dear Dave99,

1. Are "they" or rather "we" truly so, in the first place?

2. Perhaps, what has been suggested by Timmy appears to be "offensive" to their/our own core values and beliefs in the first place, so as to evoke such a strong reactions from many of the members concerned?

3. Thank you.


regards,
Kenneth KOH

 

[Kennethkohsg]

Think about cause and effect, or action and reaction. For every action you take (whether it be buying a house, or a car, or a plasma TV) it has an effect on somebody. Be aware of these effects, rather than blindly buying IP's like crazy with no regard for anything but your own financial statement.

****************************
Dear Timmy,

1. What exactly are you trying to say here? What exactly is your own bottomline?

2. I sincerely hope that you are not suggesting here, that all of us in thos forum should "keep still" and remain in a state of "inertia"... so as to help maintain status quos for all?

3. Care to further clarify your own thoughts and beliefs here, please?

4. Thank you.

regards,
Kenneth KOH