Investing and Spirituality

knightm said:
maybe a better question is "Is it ethical to use money to earn more money?" Coz at the end of the day thats what all investing is - using capital instead of sweat and time to make money.
ah yes - but is it ethical to expect future generations of taxpayers to fund our retirement and medical expenses?

i think we have an obligation to invest now, to self fund when we get to old to work, instead of demanding our grandchildren pay our pittance of a pension and expecting them to pick up the tab for all the concessions we would be entitled to plus the hip replacement, denture work, heart bypass, pharmacutical benefits scheme etc.

if that means we finish work earlier than others, and pour our investment dividends back into the community to keep they cycle of money turning, then that is also an obligation we have.

p.s. i totally agree that faith and religion are two different entities - i have faith and belief in a greater force, but i do not believe in any religion. for some reason the universe offers more assistance and opportunities to those who work hard to make them happen. ;)
 
I have learnt not to expect fairness in life, but to try to do all I can to create it, being guided from within. If we all start not giving a toss about the next guy, we will quickly live in a hell on earth. It is trust and honour and integrity that allowed modern civilization to develop and be sustained. Lose that and it won't matter how much property you have because you won't keep it for long.[/QUOTE]
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Very well said indeed!

Cheers,
Kenneth KOH
 
***************************************
Dear theFirstBruce,

1. From your own a/m answer, it is clear that you are fully aware and knows for a fact that one single investor does not cause the property boom/bust;- (rather it's the collective works of the herd instincts that collectively drives the market;-), yet you had still chosen to ask me the same question by implications;- if I am troubled and responsible for (indirectly) causing/contributing to the problem of seeing young Australians to be priced out from their housing, as an investor?"

2. So, I am not sure what exactly are you trying to say in your original question? ..." that as good Christians/people, we should not invest in property?"

3. Please clarify your questions and its underlying thinking?

4. Thank you.

regards,
Kenneth KOH

Kenneth, all I am saying is that we think about the repercussions of our actions a little more honestly and clearly, a little more intelligently.....And not hide our heads in the sands of obfuscated self justification and herd greed.

Then, let your own conscience/God guide you.

I raised the issues that I did, because they are real issues, with real serious consequences for the future of Australia.

I don't have specific answers as AussieRogue correctly noted. But if we all think and work a little smarter and insightfully, then we'll have better options to ask God help us choose between.
 
thefirstbruce said:
Kenneth, all I am saying is that we think about the repercussions of our actions a little more honestly and clearly, a little more intelligently.....And not hide our heads in the sands of obfuscated self justification and herd greed.

Then, let your own conscience/God guide you.

I raised the issues that I did, because they are real issues, with real serious consequences for the future of Australia.

I don't have specific answers as AussieRogue correctly noted. But if we all think and work a little smarter and insightfully, then we'll have better options to ask God help us choose between.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dear TheFirstBruce,

1. What does the Bible truly says about property investing per se?

2. Let me ask you back, "As a investor, do you honestly think if you have "sinned" against God or/and offend your own good conscience by investing? Why?

3. As a fellow Christian, I am honestly and sincerely interested to learn from you, as to why this is so or/and has to be so when the Bible has not specifically written about this subject?

4. In the sanctuary of our own hearts, IF we have indeed, already judged and honestly "condemned" our own worldy actions/behaviours because it is at "conflicts" with our own Christian values and beliefs, then I believe that we have not truly honoured God by our own actions/behaviours/beliefs in our own hearts, honestly speaking. To a certain extent, I believe that we have also "sinned" against God because we have NOT truthfully and honestly "living by faith" as we have been exhorted to.

5. You said, "I raised the issues that I did, because they are real issues, with real serious consequences for the future of Australia. " Do you not think that I am also raising an equally important and basic Mankind issue like housing, for you (and the other interested members) to ponder too further and on a more deeper level, whether the land concerned is in Australia, Singapore, America, Indonesia or otherwise?

6. Why think of ourselves as "Australians" only and not as fellow members of the same MANKIND/human race, as God will want us to see oursevles instead?

7. Do you seriously and honestly believe and think that God only wants "Australia" to be inhabited by/for "Australians" only, as this secular world of politics will want all of us to believe?... I humbly pray and ask that His Holy Spirit will further enlighten you on this issue and also on your own thinking, to as to acheive a deeper level of self-understanding, please.

8. Please quietly sit back and reflect over this issue deeply with a cool head before responding to me. Please re-read all my postings on this thread again if neccessary before you respond further.

9. As far as my own personal Christian teachings and understandings are concerned, I am also prepared to stand corrected where neccessary, please.


10. Let us set aside our own emotions and objectively examine the topic and its related logic/argument, in greater depth, for our own mutual good and collective learning purposes.

11. Thank you.


With Brotherly Love,
Kenneth KOH
 
Last edited:
I'm kinda confused by your views myself tfb. I don't understand where you're coming from with the whole 'investing in property might make it harder for others to get into property' view. Do you honestly believe that it is harder for young people to purchase property now than it was say, 20 years ago?

Yeah, we're coming off a boom. Yeah, property is overvalued, it's part of the cycle. There is always property somewhere that young people can afford. It might not be where they want, but they can get it if they really want it. The question is, are they willing to work for it and find ways to afford it? Why is it that you see examples of couples on small incomes in their own homes and at the same time see couples on large incomes contining to rent because 'they can't afford their own place'?

Look at Kristine's children - they can afford property on very very small incomes. Yes, they are IP's. Yes, they live at home. However, a young couple with a double income wouldn't have trouble finding a place to buy if they really wanted it. If they can't find something now, what's the harm in waiting a few years for prices to come off? Or until they are able to save a larger deposit?

Like Kenneth said, it's up to the individual to take responsibility for their own actions and decisions. Can you explain to me why, as an investor I should take into account whether Joe Blow can or cannot afford to buy the property I would like to purchase as an IP?

It's not 'me vs. the world' but I don't see why not taking into consideration why some couple can't afford the property they want for whatever reason - usually due to their own attitudes of 'I want the best and I want it now' should stop me from purchasing if I can. Taking that view, I wouldn't purchase anything - ever. Then I'd end up on the pension and totally reliant on Govt. handouts.

As investors we all work damn hard and sacrifice to differing levels to be able to afford to purchase those IP's. So again, can you explain to me why purchasing a property that in turn drives the value up is such a bad thing?

Let people take responsibility for their own choices, don't blame those that succeed.

Just one more thing - with this attitude of yours - why do you invest in property?

Mark
 
Kennethkohsg said:
1. What does the Bible truly says about property investing per se?

2. Let me ask you back, "As a investor, do you honestly think if you have "sinned" against God or/and offend your own good conscience by investing? Why?


Kenneth, I am not a master student of the Bible. I doubt it says anything specifically about property investing, just as it says nothing per se about smoking dope or injecting heroin or listening to rock music. The Bible is difficult to interpret because it says many things, applicable to different circumstances, apparently. If you read Genesis or Daniel, you'd be a vegetarian. If you read elsewhere, you'd eat meat.

Though the Bible says a lot about usury, and inconsistently so. Some parts say you can charge foreigners interest, but you can't charge your brother. Other parts say you can't use usury at all. If you haven't studied this, then I recommend you get an electronic Bible from BibleOcean.com.

As regards investing, one can invest 10 hours a week in buying shares that one hopes someone will pay 10% more for tomorrow.

One could also invest those 10 hours a week in volunteering their time to build a hospital or school in an underprivileged town or suburb. And make substantial friendships for life.

Or one could invest 10 extra hours a week building their business so as to employ 5 extra staff, and export goods overseas and help balance Australia's trade deficit.

At the end of the day, I am trying to elaborate that passive property investment isn't the pinnacle of smart investing. And that a balance is required between how much property is procured by investors versus owner occupiers. When that balance is thrown off, there are serious social ramifications, that you don't seem to be accepting Kenneth. I can assure you these issues are of serious concern to all levels of government in Australia.
 
Last edited:
I'm kinda confused by your views myself tfb. I don't understand where you're coming from with the whole 'investing in property might make it harder for others to get into property' view. Do you honestly believe that it is harder for young people to purchase property now than it was say, 20 years ago?


Yes Mark, I do believe that. As does the RBA. They have published several studies recently on housing affordability that you might like to have a read of. Compare the median price of metro homes vs median household income for a start. Then throw on top of that, that more households now rely on dual incomes; and stats for full employment now include those who can only find part time or casual full time work. Then consider the average age women first became pregnant in the 1960s versus now, then throw in comparative average family size then and now. Then factor in that household income in those days was generally dependent on one wage.

Then consider that one of the largest factors driving down affordability is the growing size of major cities. Thus there is more competition for housing close to job markets.


Yeah, we're coming off a boom. Yeah, property is overvalued, it's part of the cycle. There is always property somewhere that young people can afford.


Affordability has never been this overvalued before, esp in the capitals.

Yes, I suppose there's always somewhere people can afford property, especially if they've got time for a 3 hour commute to where the jobs are....

You mightn't have heard Ian McFarlane tell young people to leave Sydney and go and live somewhere else. Unfortunately, he didn't tell employers to move jobs out of Sydney too.



It might not be where they want, but they can get it if they really want it. The question is, are they willing to work for it and find ways to afford it? Why is it that you see examples of couples on small incomes in their own homes and at the same time see couples on large incomes contining to rent because 'they can't afford their own place'?

Look at Kristine's children - they can afford property on very very small incomes. Yes, they are IP's. Yes, they live at home. However, a young couple with a double income wouldn't have trouble finding a place to buy if they really wanted it. If they can't find something now, what's the harm in waiting a few years for prices to come off? Or until they are able to save a larger deposit?


Mark, you are ignoring one of my major thrusts, that of the impact of lower affordability on fertility rates.... You are also ignoring that there are now significant time and $ costs such as HECS necessary to compete in the job market. As you might be aware, we are exporting more and more unskilled jobs.

Feel free to write off my concerns as irrelevant rants, but these things are being discussed by the Coalition, Labor, the minor parties, the ATO, and RBA right now, in an effort to stop property investors imposing more hardship on first home buyers. If you expect negative gearing to offer the same benefits in 5 years time as it does now, then I think you are in for a big surprise.




Like Kenneth said, it's up to the individual to take responsibility for their own actions and decisions. Can you explain to me why, as an investor I should take into account whether Joe Blow can or cannot afford to buy the property I would like to purchase as an IP?

It's not 'me vs. the world' but I don't see why not taking into consideration why some couple can't afford the property they want for whatever reason - usually due to their own attitudes of 'I want the best and I want it now' should stop me from purchasing if I can. Taking that view, I wouldn't purchase anything - ever. Then I'd end up on the pension and totally reliant on Govt. handouts.


Mark, you might know a lot of people who want the best now, but half the workforce earns under the median income. Do you know what the minimum wage is Mark? And how long it would take to save a $30k deposit on that, as well as pay rent?





As investors we all work damn hard and sacrifice to differing levels to be able to afford to purchase those IP's. So again, can you explain to me why purchasing a property that in turn drives the value up is such a bad thing?


Go and read some of the stuff coming out of the RBA. THen go and work in an unconditioned meatworks in Rockhampton 40 hours a week, or as a roofer....for $15 an hour....then you'll know some others' ideas of hard work.



Let people take responsibility for their own choices, don't blame those that succeed.

That sounds very much like "me versus the world" Mark



Just one more thing - with this attitude of yours - why do you invest in property?


Property is one thing I invest in Mark. I invest in business and shares and people. When I invest in property, I aim for a win/win scenario. One where I can fill a hole in supply/demand dynamics. I try not to sit back and passively wait for property to magically go up in price.

Further, it is only in the last 2-3 years that the issues I have raised have become acute. And I am constantly trying to adapt/evolve my investment philosophy into something more informed and constructive. Passive property investment doesn't take a lot of brains Mark. In fact it'd be the dumbest form of investment I can imagine.

I gain satisfaction from working smarter. It makes me feel I am growing as a human. Finally, I am trying to stimulate a bit of deep thought and rational debate on the long term consequences of investing in property, as opposed to investing in other things that have better outcomes. I accept that not everyone has the acumen or inclination to think astutely or rationally about the matter. THey are the ones that will have the hardest time adapting to the inevitbale tax changes re the negative gearing of investment property
 
Last edited:
tfb,

Some interesting points there. I don't agree with most of them, but that's okay - if we all agreed on everything, nothing would change.

I would like to address some points there however.

Feel free to write off my concerns as irrelevant rants, but these things are being discussed by the Coalition, Labor, the minor parties, the ATO, and RBA right now, in an effort to stop property investors imposing more hardship on first home buyers. If you expect negative gearing to offer the same benefits in 5 years time as it does now, then I think you are in for a big surprise.

- Where did I write anything you said off as 'irrelevant rants'?
- How are investors imposing hardship on first home buyers?
- Can you honestly tell me these 'discussions' by the major parties aren't just fluff to score votes? Little Johnny doesn't seem to be too concerned about the working classes, given his IR legislation.
- Please point out in my post where I mentioned negative gearing.

Mark, you might know a lot of people who want the best now, but half the workforce earns under the median income. Do you know what the minimum wage is Mark? And how long it would take to save a $30k deposit on that, as well as pay rent?

TFB, I have always earned well below the median income. I am very well aware of what the minimum wage is - I've been earning it or close to it for most of my working life, sometimes below it. I am also very well aware of how long it takes to save $30,000 on close to the minimum wage while renting - because I did it. And I was renting in St Kilda, which isn't exactly cheap. Like I said, there are people that are willing to take responsibility and there are people that refuse to.

Just to let you know, I have a friend who was on the same wages as me who bought a house 3 hrs away from work - yes, she travelled three hours each way daily to get to work. Ideal? Of course not! But hey - she has the option of using the growth in that property now to buy something closer. Would that growth happen now? Not likely, but there are ALWAYS options. Making excuses for people based on low affordability doesn't solve anything.

Go and read some of the stuff coming out of the RBA. THen go and work in an unconditioned meatworks in Rockhampton 40 hours a week, or as a roofer....for $15 an hour....then you'll know some others' ideas of hard work.

How dare you! You have NO idea what my working history is, you have NO idea what I've had to do to get to where I am today. How about you leave emotion out of this discussion and get down off your soap box? By the way, $15 an hour is more - significantly more - than the wages I've earned for most of my working life.

Let people take responsibility for their own choices, don't blame those that succeed.

That sounds very much like "me versus the world" Mark


Explain to me how that is 'me vs. the world'.

I gain satisfaction from working smarter. It makes me feel I am growing as a human. Finally, I am trying to stimulate a bit of deep thought and rational debate on the long term consequences of investing in property, as opposed to investing in other things that have better outcomes. I accept that not everyone has the acumen or inclination to think astutely or rationally about the matter. THey are the ones that will have the hardest time adapting to the inevitbale tax changes re the negative gearing of investment property

What is it that you are saying here? Again, what does negative gearing have to do with anything I discussed?

We have a number of issues relating to population and housing, etc here in Australia, but to point the finger at investors and accuse them of being the ones that are holding first home buyers back is, in my opinion, nonsense. It solves nothing and the real issues get left behind. Without investors in the market, - for the Govt. - housing everyone would be a nightmare, nigh on impossible. But you're a sharp guy, you knew that already.

Mark
 
Mark Laszczuk said:
We have a number of issues relating to population and housing, etc here in Australia, but to point the finger at investors and accuse them of being the ones that are holding first home buyers back is, in my opinion, nonsense. It solves nothing and the real issues get left behind. Without investors in the market, - for the Govt. - housing everyone would be a nightmare, nigh on impossible. But you're a sharp guy, you knew that already.

Mark

Mark, negative gearing has everything to do with what I am saying.
Don't take my word for it.
But please consider reading some of these links, esp the RBA one. It will explain in detail much of what I have alluded to above:
http://www.rba.gov.au/PublicationsA...ommision_inquiry_on_first_home_ownership.html
http://www.domain.com.au/Public/Article.aspx?id=1130720521159&index=NationalIndex
http://www.domain.com.au/Public/Article.aspx?index=PropertyNews&id=1130720521242
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/06/23/1087845011162.html?oneclick=true
http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2004/s1086667.htm
http://afr.com/articles/2004/06/23/1087845008042.html
 
thefirstbruce said:
Mark, negative gearing has everything to do with what I am saying.
Don't take my word for it.
But please consider reading some of these links, esp the RBA one. It will explain in detail much of what I have alluded to above:

nice link list tfb,
whilst I didn't read them all, I found the RBA one worth reading if only for the content to help me continue to understand that housing over time continues to be one of the key pillars of my overall investment plan. The article provides an insight into the current govt thinking and provides info to check my overall strategy and potential steps I may need to plan for in that strategy delivery

thanks for the thought provoking concepts.
 
Wow I love watching how these things become a beast all their own!

Good posting everyone - esp tfb for persevering with your points. Sometimes u have a blunt way of saying things that gets people upity but thats fun on these forums ;)

Agree boomers may cause serious distortions in investment property market ratios and this is likely to cause amendments (rollbacks) to neg gearing to lessen the attractiveness of ips. Is this ethics or just the way things are? I dunno.

Also tfb interesting point that ips aren't the highest form of investment. I agree, and beleive that it is not unethical of itself (providing housing is better than providing an adictive and lethal substances like cigarettes etc), but not inherently good either.

starting a business from scratch, coming up with ideas to solve problems, directly employing staff - is definitely more active, more creative, and probably a "more pure" form of making money but still has the potential to be done with good or bad ethics.

I guess if we cant ask ourselves some hard questions then we wont grow - simple as that.
 
Other reasons property is out of range for a lot of first home buyes have been mentioned before, but I will mention the again.

As mentioned people in this age, watch tv, and read the glossy magazines, and want the best first up, rather than starting at the bottom in a lesser suburb, and upgrading over time.

Also young people dont want to stay at home with mum and dad, until they save up a deposit. They want to move out at 18, into a nice apartment, and live the fast life with friends.

While I think its harder than ever to enter the market now for first home buyers, its still achievable for anyone who saves, minimum 10% of what they make. People can save a deposit on the dole even if they need to, although they would need to look in a rural/country area.

Cheers
mono
 
thefirstbruce said:
And that a balance is required between how much property is procured by investors versus owner occupiers. When that balance is thrown off, there are serious social ramifications, that you don't seem to be accepting Kenneth. I can assure you these issues are of serious concern to all levels of government in Australia.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dear theFirstBruce,

1. No, I think you have mis-understood my position.

2. I do agree with your position and concerns on this issue specifically.

3. What I am in effect saying are as follows:

a. To each his/her own, as far as property investing is concerned. This is because as property investors, we all have different callings in life and we all have different life attitudes/values system towards wealth creation and personal life ethics, especially those with different religions and values system.

b. To me, Monies/Wealth creation is and of itself is not evil, according to the Bible. It is our love of MONIES ( which in itself is considered as a form of idol worshipping or for that matter, if our love for other things, people, activities etc), that cause us to love God less or/and cause us to replace God in our own lives, is the root of all evils.

c. There may be some Christains who have the mistaken beliefs that God wants all Christians to be "poor" and that being rich (in this earthly) life is something that all Christians ought to shun away from. I do not agree with such kind of inaccurate and presumptous Christain teachings/positions at all (as I personally believe God wants all His children to prosper) though I also do agree too that it is easier for the poor and the meek to enter the Kingdom of God, than the rich people in general, as is presently taught in the Bible.

d. There is always 2 sides to the same coin/argument, (and I am not trying to justify myself here. Neither do I need to here, as I am very clear what I am doing vis-a-vis my own Christain faith).

e. To some people, investing in rental properties can help to create jobs and cause the Australian economy to boom/sustain over a longer periuod of time as well as helping the Australian Govt to help provide low cost affordable housing to help some Australians to have a roof over their heads through the house renting option. To others, they seem to "blame" the investors for exploiting the poor indirectly and profit themsevles at the expense of the poor and yet at the same time, they fail to a provide a pragmatic and cost-effective answer to house the poor adequately and failing to appreciate the positive benefits of investors buying into rental properties.

f. Australia is a much blessed country and has plentiful of land supply. At the root and basic issue of housing affordability, is definitely not one of natural land supply per se;- but rather the Man-made economics concept of "limited land supply" and its subsequent land pricings, as created by the Human Race.

g. Why the housing is made "un-affordable" is fundamentally, a result/outcome of people's lifestyle choices and their competitive human nature to bid up the price of certain seemingly socially desirable areas selfishly, until the land prices becomes un-affordable to the other people.

h. Examining this basic social phenomenon in a greater depth and at a more basic fundamental level, we can see MAN is actually trying to "selfishly" acquire and to keep what he/she perceives to be the "best" lands wholly for themselves, without due regard to share with the general public, even though the ultimate " best" lands ( as deemed by God) need not neccessarily be the most expensive ones.

i. Thus, the issue of housing unaffordability is a MAN-made problem, and as a result of the herd instincts and Man-made concept of (limited) land supply and land pricings economics.

j. We always have a choice not to follow this same selfish herd instincts. Not do we need to at all if we truly and sincerely beleive and trust God as the source of all our Providence.

k. We can always choose to live in more affordable areas and discover/appreciate or/and help create, the natural beauty in the new or/and more affordable suburbs, by God's Grace.

l. While, it may sound idealistic and self-sacrificing though to being deemed ridiculous by some, by deliberately choosing to live in the seemingly less socially desirable and thus more affordable areas, we are in effect, actually showing our love and respect and to intentionally deferring/allowing our neighbours/others to have the seemingly better lands for themselves as was socially/collectively perceived at this point in time, while we try to learn look to and trust God for His Providence and Blessings in our lives with respect to the so-called housing benefits.

m. Eventually, other people start to see/ discover the same beauty in the new/more affordable suburbs and start to compete for them and evetually bid up the land prices there until they become the new hotspot growth areas.

n. Thus, if we are realistic and pragmatic, we can always look to live in the new affordable areas/suburbs or/and to consider renting in the prevailing expensive suburbs which are being perceived as socially more desirable.

o. Human choices always come with a price and a trade off.

p. It is up to each of us to be self-responsible and to live responsibly and realistically with our own means especially in respect to our own housing choices.

q. Blaming others/investors for causing the suburbs to be priced out is not a healthy nor a fruitful solution.

r. Assuming if we all choose to follow para k-n , instead of blindly following the present herd instinct, by creating more supply of new socially desirable areas to live in, it will not be as easy for us to be priced out for our own housing needs, as it is now and provided all the Australian peoples are willing to co-operate with one another to make this a reality for themselves and their own children/future generations.

s. Personally, I do not think that MAN will eventually grow to "over-populate" the Mother Earth. Not do I think God will allow it. It is however, up to Mankind to find his own place on Mother Earth and in the Great Universe that God has created.

4. For your kind update, please.

5. Thank you.

regards,
Kenneth KOH
 
thefirstbruce said:
Kenneth, I am not a master student of the Bible. I doubt it says anything specifically about property investing, just as it says nothing per se about smoking dope or injecting heroin or listening to rock music. The Bible is difficult to interpret because it says many things, applicable to different circumstances, apparently. If you read Genesis or Daniel, you'd be a vegetarian. If you read elsewhere, you'd eat meat.

Though the Bible says a lot about usury, and inconsistently so. Some parts say you can charge foreigners interest, but you can't charge your brother. Other parts say you can't use usury at all. If you haven't studied this, then I recommend you get an electronic Bible from BibleOcean.com.

QUOTE]
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dear theFirstBruce,

1. My Christian faith is a simple one of LOVE, as was/is taught by and summed up by Jesus Christ Himself in the Bible into the following 2 commandments:

1. Love the Lord, Our God first... with all our hearts.
2. Love our neighbours/others as we will want others to love us"


2. Personally for me, it not what we eat or/and do that actually sin against God per se;- rather, it is when we fail to love/to acknowledge God and His presence in our own lives be it in all our thoughts, actions, behaviours or/and failing to love others as we love ourselves.

3.To state and sum up our Christian faith simply and in the positively sense, we are simplyl called to show/manifest and spread His Spirit of LOVE among our fellow Mankind.

4. For your kind update, please.

5. Thank you.

Cheers,
Kenneth KOH
 
monoply said:
Other reasons property is out of range for a lot of first home buyes have been mentioned before, but I will mention the again.

As mentioned people in this age, watch tv, and read the glossy magazines, and want the best first up, rather than starting at the bottom in a lesser suburb, and upgrading over time.

Also young people dont want to stay at home with mum and dad, until they save up a deposit. They want to move out at 18, into a nice apartment, and live the fast life with friends.

While I think its harder than ever to enter the market now for first home buyers, its still achievable for anyone who saves, minimum 10% of what they make. People can save a deposit on the dole even if they need to, although they would need to look in a rural/country area.

Cheers
mono
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
Dear Monopoly,

1. Very well said indeed.


Dear theFirstBruce,

1. I think Monopoly has summed up one part of the equation on your house non-affordability issue, very well in her post, which I think that you may have failed to acknowledge, in the first place.

2. Secondly, it is also interesting to note that whether it was 20 years ago, 30 years ago or now, the proportion of house ownership in Australia between owners-occupiers and rental housing (as owned by investors) has remained largely and consistently around 70% and 30% respectively. What conclusions can we then draw from this interesting observation?

3. So how, many people do you personally reckoned, were actually being priced out of the housing affordability across time, if we were to conduct a longitudinal studies?...OR is this housing issue, actually caused by more young people trying to live beyond their means unrealistically and having to make some adjustments to their own housing need expectations realistically speaking?

4. Why do you think that Australian Govt continues to encourage the investors to continue to invest into the rental housing sector through their deliberate policy of providing generous tax benefits for the property investors? Are they some constructive roles played by these investors concerned, as far as the Australian Govt is concerned that you are prepared to acknowledge? If so, what are these social and national benefits gained by Australia through property investing by investors?

5. For your kind update and considerations, please.

6. Thank you.

regards,
Kenneth KOH
 
Dear theFirstBruce,

1. I just want to share with you this property investing experience that I have, at the Anchorage Estate, at Rockingham coastal suburb, which is some 45 Km south of Perth CBD.

2. When the land price was about $58,000-$68,000 per vacant lot back in 2002, the local people who have been living there during all these time, did not believe in buying into this coastal suburb then.

3. I first invested into this suburb in late 2002/early 2003 on 2 pieces of vacant land for about $72,000-$75,000 per vacant land lot, the local people continue to ignore the suburb.

4. Now, fast forward to the present day in 2005, when Australand no longer has any land for sale again after its last Stage 17 Land Release, yet a lot of the local people are now begining/keep on wanting to buy into this same Estate (which they chosen to ignore some 2 years back) now even though the vacant land price has risen to some $180,000 per vacant lot in the resale market.

5. Such is the nature of our own human behaviours and the operation of the herd instincts.

6. I am sure that we can all expect to hear soon that some Australians will similarly complained about going to be priced out from this coastal suburb too, in the near future.

7. So, do we blame the local people for ignoring their land and getting low values for their land in the past or do we blame the new investors for causing the land values in this suburb to rise?

8. I will like to hear your own personal views in this case.

9. Thank you.


regards,
Kenneth
 
Kennethkohsg said:
4. Now, fast forward to the present day in 2005, when Australand no longer has any land for sale again after its last Stage 17 Land Release, yet a lot of the local people are now begining/keep on wanting to buy into this same Estate (which they chosen to ignore some 2 years back) now even though the vacant land price has risen to some $180,000 per vacant lot in the resale market.

5. Such is the nature of our own human behaviours and the operation of the herd instincts.

6. I am sure that we can all expect to hear soon that some Australians will similarly complained about going to be priced out from this coastal suburb too, in the near future.

7. So, do we blame the local people for ignoring their land and getting low values for their land in the past or do we blame the new investors for causing the land values in this suburb to rise?



regards,
Kenneth

Kenneth, in response to your many points above, I respond thus:

- if you are happy in not pursuing a more enlightened way to accumulate wealth, other then to buy property that the herd will drive up in price out of ignorance, then that is where you are on your investment journey. I am merely trying to point out the folly of believing the herd will run forever, and the lost opportunity of smart people not taking a more informed approach to investing.

- My views remain partial to those expressed in the links I provided above. Please absorb them before further discussion, as they will clarify many of the issues I have tried to express above. They are the views of the governor of the RBA and respected Australian tax experts. I don't claim to have made them up when contemplating my navel in the desert :)

- As for what Christianity is and isn't, I'm happy to leave that up to scholars.
 
thefirstbruce - if you are happy in not pursuing a more enlightened way to accumulate wealth said:
**********************************8
Dear thefirstbruce,

1. I am definitely open and more than happy to learn from you (as well as the other members) other new/more enlightened ways to build/accumulate wealth if you care to show and teach me how, as long as it is line with our Christian faith and values system.

2. Thank you.

Cheers,
Kenneth KOH
 
thefirstbruce said:
- My views remain partial to those expressed in the links I provided above. Please absorb them before further discussion, as they will clarify many of the issues I have tried to express above. They are the views of the governor of the RBA and respected Australian tax experts. I don't claim to have made them up when contemplating my navel in the desert :)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dear thefirstbruce,

1. As the present thread concerns "Investing and spirituality", the issues referred by you is best discussed separately under another new thread separately.

2. It is said, "Politics is dirty". Do you really belieive and trust the politicians over what they have said publicly?... Sorry, I generally don't, myself.

3. To me, politics is actually a game of public persuasion to influence and to seize the power to rule the masses. I always have to remind myself why a particular person is saying what and for what openly stated purposes and (undisclosed) intentions/motives, especially if that person is a known politician... Is the contents of the speech/opinions experessed meant for public consumption only or truly reflective of what a particular politician truly believes and means what he/she said.

4. Yes, I will read and check out what some of the top civil servants in Australia are saying what they want to say about a particular subject but I have to also bear in mind that it is ultimately the politicians which rule the country, who will actually decide how a particular policy is to be decidced/played out ultimately.

5. To me, often it is what that is "unwritten" and "unstated publicly" by the politicians/govt that is truly important for me, as to real reasons/rationale underlying a particular public policy which the Govt/politicians are introducing for the first time in general.

6. For your kind update, please.

7. Thank you.

regards,
Kenneth KOH
 
Kenneth, I am trying my best to make money ethically, though I am also here on the forum to learn from others.

Some of the things I am considering at the moment are medium term accomodation, storage sheds, auto car washes, and a combined health spa/gymnasium - all in regional areas of Qld where there is demand for these.

Other things I am invested in currently are an earthworks business specializing in boulder walls, a telecommunications tower installation business specializing in very remote tower installs (this is soon to expand into manufacturing the telecommunication towers). And my physiotherapy business.

I am also researching with a psychologist, a software backend module for online introduction sites such as www.rsvp.com.au, which aims to apply scientifically validated compatibility criteria. Some might question the ethics of this, as I did when i first pondered it. However, I have come to believe the advantages outweigh any disadvantages...

I suppose at the end of the day, to invest ethically and wisely is to open one's eyes and talk to people openly every week about business and opportunity and where there is legitimate demand for goods or services....then provide same more cost effectively, more intelligently, and with superior service.
 
Back
Top