Richard Feyman on 7:30 report

Cool . Steve you came across well , Logical , level headed .:rolleyes:

But we know the truth .... :eek: ;)

Now it's time to through away that Mr Nice Guy image .

GO and Hype Sydney !!!! :D

Cliff
 
Nice work Richard.
Though that doesn't unit you were in doesn't look like the typical one you would normally invest in?

You trying to keep your trade secrets hidden on TV? :D:p
 
As mentioned in another topic about this:

Richard Feynman said:
My main hope is that the piece might stimulate conversation and encourage a few people to learn a bit more and take control of their (financial) future.

There was a clear agenda and an absence of facts and evidence for either side, just lots of bite-sized opinions, but that's what you come to expect on tv--very surface level.

So far, my hope seems to be realising itself. I've had some people contact me out of the blue (having seen the piece) and ask to pick my brain.


Nice work Richard.
Though that doesn't unit you were in doesn't look like the typical one you would normally invest in?

You trying to keep your trade secrets hidden on TV? :D:p

Showbiz--I wouldn't touch that place (or anything in Sydney) at the moment and made sure the agent, interviewer, cameraman and audio technician all knew it. Should see what didn't make the cut!
 
Ha... Richard Feynman has shaved & had a haircut! :)

1. I'm not sure why many non-investors think that they are subsidising negative gearing.
2. They talk about lose revenue of 5 billion or what ever. Why don't they ever talk about the stamp duty, land tax and capital gain tax?
 
Ha... Richard Feynman has shaved & had a haircut! :)

1. I'm not sure why many non-investors think that they are subsidising negative gearing.
2. They talk about lose revenue of 5 billion or what ever. Why don't they ever talk about the stamp duty, land tax and capital gain tax?
Not sure what your point is about #2. Sure those items might reduce to some extent if negative gearing was removed but it would still be a net revenue raiser for govt.
 
Not sure what your point is about #2. Sure those items might reduce to some extent if negative gearing was removed but it would still be a net revenue raiser for govt.

One less property transaction = one less stamp duty revenue
One less IP traction = potentially one less land tax revenue + one less CG tax.
 
Back
Top