So do you think would be better for property investors liberal or labor and why?
Liberal or labor , who's better for property investors ?
- Thread starter see_change
- Start date
For CP, the Libs. Better at building business confidence and they'll end up paying the rent.
For RIP, I'd say either really, maybe the Libs in front by a fraction. Labor just want to tax everything to death and introduce all their social welfare programs, Libs just want to cut back everything and introduce tax reforms.
For RIP, I'd say either really, maybe the Libs in front by a fraction. Labor just want to tax everything to death and introduce all their social welfare programs, Libs just want to cut back everything and introduce tax reforms.
My understanding ( second hand ) is that there is a considerable amount of money waiting to be invested which is sitting on the sidelines waiting for a liberal government , who are traditionally more pro investing .
Once that gets in , the increase wealth generated with boost the economy , increasing property values , share market etc accelerating the embryonic boom .
Cliff
Once that gets in , the increase wealth generated with boost the economy , increasing property values , share market etc accelerating the embryonic boom .
Cliff
I remember the good old rudd FHB bonus in 2009? was it.
Some could say that was good for investors
Some could say that was good for investors
Yeah, right. That's why when Turnbull was leader, Rudd was winning by a clear margin.
There should be a third option in the poll, "It doesn't matter".
Speaking with a senior economist a few months ago the subject of the election came up (back when Gillard was leader). His opinion was that it didn't make much difference which part was in power. Having seen booms and busts under Howard, Rudd & Gillard, I'm inclined to agree.
Speaking with a senior economist a few months ago the subject of the election came up (back when Gillard was leader). His opinion was that it didn't make much difference which part was in power. Having seen booms and busts under Howard, Rudd & Gillard, I'm inclined to agree.
While Turnbull comes across as more of a statesman and clearly has more personal appeal. I actually think Abbott is the better politician.
He is very clever in what he says and does - also helps that the policies he supports are liberal policy, unlike Malcolm.
We've heard very little from Malcolm in the last 2 years.
He is very clever in what he says and does - also helps that the policies he supports are liberal policy, unlike Malcolm.
We've heard very little from Malcolm in the last 2 years.
Abbott . Too much baggage for me . I think he's hypocritical ( but then again which politician isn't ) .
Also he lets his personal opinions alter his decisions . He was behind a move to make it harder , financial , to obtain terminations . This affected the lower ses segments , not the wealthier sections.
The only reason I'll vote for him is too get labor out . Since Rudd got back in he's just done the same as before , making policy up on the run for the headlines.
I was a big fan of his back in 2007 But while he talks the talk he never actually delivers .
http://somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24987&highlight=Rudderless . Interesting seeing that post and seeing what people thought of Rudd and Gillard . I think both disappointed .
Cliff
Also he lets his personal opinions alter his decisions . He was behind a move to make it harder , financial , to obtain terminations . This affected the lower ses segments , not the wealthier sections.
The only reason I'll vote for him is too get labor out . Since Rudd got back in he's just done the same as before , making policy up on the run for the headlines.
I was a big fan of his back in 2007 But while he talks the talk he never actually delivers .
http://somersoft.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24987&highlight=Rudderless . Interesting seeing that post and seeing what people thought of Rudd and Gillard . I think both disappointed .
Cliff
And it is also worth noting that they don't control all the variables with regards to thinks that matter to property investors (see: What do we stand for?).
Particularly with regards to things like planning laws, (a lot of) infrastructure (most roads, rail, etc), even stamp duties.... those things are in the domain of the states and territories.
Last edited:
Are you serious? You must be a strong Liberals supporter to think like that.
um argh um argh. You can't trust what I say as gospel truth...
Having met both again this part week, I must admit Kevin Rudd is far superior people person and fantastic in communicating to his audience.
Even with his wife alongside him, Tony is a poor speaker and very negative in his comments. He also has an appalling sense of humour.
I agree with what was stated earlier that regardless of who wins, what will happen to Australia's economy will happen.
Even with his wife alongside him, Tony is a poor speaker and very negative in his comments. He also has an appalling sense of humour.
I agree with what was stated earlier that regardless of who wins, what will happen to Australia's economy will happen.
I can vote for a man who has principle and stands by it.
Julia and KDudd's moral/economic compass has been guided by the greens, Union stooges, newspoll and the twitsphere for the last 5 years.
Who knows what Labor actually stands for? At least Abbott has laid it out. he deserves a go.
What's good for property investors isn't necessarily good for the country.
We've had two booms recently. A credit boom and a mining boom. Both are over leaving now Australia with a double digit cost disequilibrium that's needs to be sorted out by a perhaps a bi-partisan approach to our problems.
Australia need 3% growth just to maintain employment. It used to be 3.5% but is lower now as the baby boomers reach retirement age.
Growth is forecast to be 2.5%
Many of Australia's prices are highly indexed. e.g. Wages and utility prices are automatically adjusted to cpi or more.
In just a few years all the GST revenue will be consumed by health care.
All those superannuation concessions, tax cuts and welfare increases instituted by the Howard-Costello government and continued by Rudd-Swan as election promises are recurrent expenditures that will have to be paid for without the increasing growth in mining revenue.
Add in the new expenditure items of government policy and you will see the money will have to come from somewhere.
Households won't be able to refuel a credit boom unless their wages increase above cpi, which would be unsustainable anyway.
Shopkeepers are being strangled by too high rents, wages and regulatory requirements that overseas competitors don't have to contend with.
Australia is uncompetitive on the world stage.
What? That's the weather vane you are talking about. Tells the target audience of the day what they want to hear so constantly contradicts himself.
