Exactly. I've never had to evict anyone yet (touch wood) but wouldn't hesitate to do so. The cold hard fact is that many of the people who rent do so because they don't have the brains or character to control their spending, and me letting them live for free does nothing to rectify this situation.
What ever happened to inspired conversation ...
- Thread starter mystery
- Start date
Exactly. I've never had to evict anyone yet (touch wood) but wouldn't hesitate to do so. The cold hard fact is that many of the people who rent do so because they don't have the brains or character to control their spending, and me letting them live for free does nothing to rectify this situation.
No, some get evicted because their landlord overstretched themselves and is in foreclosure. This never happened before in the past because landlords tended to be wealthy and conservative investors, now even a "low income erner" (sic) wants to be a landlord and many have terrifying leverage.
Thus NSW is having to write new laws to protect tenants and give them 30 days if their landlord defaults.
They can also be evicted if their landlord wants to change asset classes and it is bought by an OO or the landlord wants to move into their place to live in there and get around the capital gains tax, etc.
However, I'm personally ok with this small risk because of the financial benefits (and my landlord reassured me they don't plan to sell etc)
Not me!
Burn Hollywood burn! Take down Tinsel-town, burn down to the ground!
More niave gutter trash. Must we continually have you say things you know nothing about. How about you do some research before you hit the submit button.
HG,
in the case of the tenant being evicted due to the Owner being foreclosed due to Bankruptcy or similar, you will find that in 99.9% of those times that alternative arrangements are made for them by the managing agent, or sometimes they simply stay in the property until all the dusts settles. Very rarely are they thrown out on the street. Name an instance; actually; name 10.
In contrast, very rarely does it ever happen that the Tenant from hell gets thrown out on the street due to Tenancy Agreement violations. All they need to do is throw a $20 bill in the direction of the P.M and the whole process starts all over again.
The whole system is weighted markedly in favour of the poor old tenants' rights, while the Landlord; the person who has taken all the risk, worked their guts out to save a deposit, bought the property and is now providing a roof for someone less fortunate (sometimes not less fortunate) person/family gets no thanks and is disadvantaged when the Tenant chooses to be an ar**hole.
In any case, every tenant moves into a new property knowing that is there is at least a slim chance that they may have to move on at some point in time for reasons beyond their control.
This is another factor driving people to buy their own homes; to force up the prices; the ability to control their own destiny; to have a place that is theirs and they will pay a premium for that.
The fact that there is a choice for people; rent or buy, makes this the greatest country in the world. You choose to not buy because you think the whole system is wrong, the property market is overpriced, or whatever, but the reality is there are people out there buying properties every day, being happy about it, getting rich and/or living a nice life in their little piece of Aus. This is fantastic.
I am so proud that we can all easily (not always so easy or we would all do it) become much more wealthy through real estate (or shares, businesses), and it really pisses me off when I keep hearing from people about how the 'greedy' rich are using the poor, getting rich off their backs ra, ra, ra.
It's total BS - how many poor people do you know who are making a difference out there in the world? Wouldn't you rather see a society making money and doing good deeds, rather than a whole country full of renters who do nothing and can't help the world because they sat on their hands waiting for the 'real' value to return to the market?
I know there are greedy rich people too, but there are not many poor people building new schools in Africa (Oprah), or spending $1 mill per day on charitable pursuits (Bill Gates).The greedy rich is a myth; most of them are doing a lot behind the scenes and don't ever want preople to find out about it.
And why would you want Hollywood to burn? You may not like the people, but it gives us some great movies and tv shows, and it makes an awful lot of people awfully rich, and an awful lot of those people do an awful lot of good deeds with their awful money.
Ring up Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Beverly Hills (my wife worked there for 2 years) and ask them how much money Steven Speilberg, or Sidney Poictier, or Tom Hanks, or Morgan Freeman donates to the hospital every year. Ill bet it is more than 10 times yours or my yearly income for each of them.
Oh yeah; Steve Speilberg is one of those awful people driving up the prices of the real estate by buying a $20 mill house. And, through him paying far too much money for his house, he made someone else rich along the way by accident. Shame on him.
in the case of the tenant being evicted due to the Owner being foreclosed due to Bankruptcy or similar, you will find that in 99.9% of those times that alternative arrangements are made for them by the managing agent, or sometimes they simply stay in the property until all the dusts settles. Very rarely are they thrown out on the street. Name an instance; actually; name 10.
In contrast, very rarely does it ever happen that the Tenant from hell gets thrown out on the street due to Tenancy Agreement violations. All they need to do is throw a $20 bill in the direction of the P.M and the whole process starts all over again.
The whole system is weighted markedly in favour of the poor old tenants' rights, while the Landlord; the person who has taken all the risk, worked their guts out to save a deposit, bought the property and is now providing a roof for someone less fortunate (sometimes not less fortunate) person/family gets no thanks and is disadvantaged when the Tenant chooses to be an ar**hole.
In any case, every tenant moves into a new property knowing that is there is at least a slim chance that they may have to move on at some point in time for reasons beyond their control.
This is another factor driving people to buy their own homes; to force up the prices; the ability to control their own destiny; to have a place that is theirs and they will pay a premium for that.
The fact that there is a choice for people; rent or buy, makes this the greatest country in the world. You choose to not buy because you think the whole system is wrong, the property market is overpriced, or whatever, but the reality is there are people out there buying properties every day, being happy about it, getting rich and/or living a nice life in their little piece of Aus. This is fantastic.
I am so proud that we can all easily (not always so easy or we would all do it) become much more wealthy through real estate (or shares, businesses), and it really pisses me off when I keep hearing from people about how the 'greedy' rich are using the poor, getting rich off their backs ra, ra, ra.
It's total BS - how many poor people do you know who are making a difference out there in the world? Wouldn't you rather see a society making money and doing good deeds, rather than a whole country full of renters who do nothing and can't help the world because they sat on their hands waiting for the 'real' value to return to the market?
I know there are greedy rich people too, but there are not many poor people building new schools in Africa (Oprah), or spending $1 mill per day on charitable pursuits (Bill Gates).The greedy rich is a myth; most of them are doing a lot behind the scenes and don't ever want preople to find out about it.
And why would you want Hollywood to burn? You may not like the people, but it gives us some great movies and tv shows, and it makes an awful lot of people awfully rich, and an awful lot of those people do an awful lot of good deeds with their awful money.
Ring up Cedars-Sinai Hospital in Beverly Hills (my wife worked there for 2 years) and ask them how much money Steven Speilberg, or Sidney Poictier, or Tom Hanks, or Morgan Freeman donates to the hospital every year. Ill bet it is more than 10 times yours or my yearly income for each of them.
Oh yeah; Steve Speilberg is one of those awful people driving up the prices of the real estate by buying a $20 mill house. And, through him paying far too much money for his house, he made someone else rich along the way by accident. Shame on him.
Last edited:
You don't want to know Yield; it will just re-affirm what you've been going on about all this time; lots of Ponzis, with a few over-extended sub-primers losing their houses. Now is the time for you to move in I guess. The rent returns wouldn't attract you though.
But you wouldn't want to make a profit from someone else's misfortune would you? You would want to pay them what the market says it's worth wouldn't you?
Did I mention that O/O over here get a tax deduction on their loan interest? It's downright disgraceful isn't it?
Why should they get a break like that? - the poor old renters aren't privvy to such perks. Shameful. The rich just get richer.....
No, No - I would take advantage. You've thrown me in with the wrong camp. I didn't try and short property to be nice!
Actually I think that is sort of logical in a way. Sort of evens up the playing field. You invest in something and your return is that you don't need to pay rent. An invester invests in something and their return (apparantly) is rent. So they should both get a tax deduction on interest if it was to be fair.
I have no personal opinion about BidWell, I merely repeated what the market and many SydneySiders have said - and which makes me think that opportunity waits the right person there.
Yes, for me, I'm pretty sure that BidWell, and Sydney, compare unfavorably with camping in the bush on the inspiration stakes.
Glad to hear that you find the area improving and I hope you are able to invest in inspired ways which will dispell the pall of negativity SydneySiders have towards BidWell. Next time I'm compelled to go to Sydney, I'll see if I can have a look around from the point of view of a potential resident.
So much better etc, ... if you insist, however, I was trying to help you see if you have overlooked any inspiring new way of looking at the place which might be important opportunities for you beyond just tommorows rent.
ah yes - bring back the good old days of 120 years ago when three families would live in one room, no running water, no electricity, no heating, sewerage running in the streets, mother prostituting herself so she could buy a loaf of bread to feed the kids. evicted on site if you couldn't physically hand over the rent on rent day, a day and night shift worker playing tag team sharing a bed (assuming you had a job), four year olds sent up chimneys, old men breaking rocks for a day for a meal ... and the slum landlords were extremely wealthy.
yep - those were the days.
as for bidwell - wasn't it merely 20 years ago potts point was considered the a*se end - prostitutes and one star b&b's? fifty years ago where to say you came from woolloomoolloo was to envoke pity and scorn? ten years ago redfern was a serious no-go zone even for the police and is slowly coming good. not knowing sydney very well i am sure there is a suburb for every decade that has since come good.
goodness, what a blinkered existance you d&g-ers lead. and don't forget that the prime land the current bber's are living on was out in the sticks, at the end of the gravel road, when they bought it 30-50 years ago ... in another 30-50 years the current outer suburbs will also be considered prime real estate as the city moves outwards and upwards.
from all you have said i cannot understand how you think you "understand investing". very little you have said stacks up historically or currently. you can either profit and influence the community for the better - or you can carry on complaining and doing nothing and influence nothing.
now time to pop back onto domain.com to look for my next purchase ....
If this occurred in the past, why is legislation to give tenants 30 days when the LL forecloses only being drafted now?
Considering that the most optimistic forecasts by the oil companies give ~40 years until we've exploited all of the world's oil resources, I doubt it. Those areas are just not livable without cheap abundant & liquid fuels.
Just like house prices you can't extrapolate past trends if the trend is unsustainable, and we live in a finite world that doesn't violate the laws of thermodynamics - energy is going to get a lot more expensive
Those distant unwalkable suburbs that are too low-density to be properly serviced by public transport will almost certainly be ghost towns by the end of my working life.
It's called pollitics. Must we explain everything to you?
That's not explaining it at all. So you believe the problem of foreclosing landlords has always been there, but the political will to do something about it suddenly appeared?
It's not because it has become more of a problem with low-doc loans, high leverage and low yields that make today's property market far different than the past?
It's a myth that new outer suburbs have particularly low population densities.
The lowest population densities are found in leafy middle-ring suburbs with big blocks, small household sizes and (sometimes) NIMBY councils that don't permit infill development.
Even inner suburbs that 'look' high density (ie with terrace houses etc) are often no more dense than outer suburbs since the average household sizes in these areas are closer to 1 than 3.
Street layout is more important than small variations in density as regards to the ability to efficiently serve an area by public transport. Refer to articles/books by Paul Mees for details of how good public transport can operate in dispersed cities.
Yes, inner ring suburbs get public transport by default just because lots of people have to pass through them on the way to the CBD. My block is 1000sqm from the 1950s, while you probably couldn't get that nowdays even on the fringe.
I've been to outer suburbs and it can be a 20 minute walk to a store of any kind, I thought this was due to low-density not being able to support stores when people drove to malls, but maybe it is due to zoning or not having enough time yet to build up the community.
I'd be interested in reading that book, and will take a look.
I've been to outer suburbs and it can be a 20 minute walk to a store of any kind, I thought this was due to low-density not being able to support stores when people drove to malls, but maybe it is due to zoning or not having enough time yet to build up the community.
I'd be interested in reading that book, and will take a look.
What optimistic forecasts have you been reading?
Must be swamped by the D&G media (who are usually flogging PM's) if that's the most optimist forecast you are aware of! Do some more reading.
Yes PO is a massive issue and I agree with the idea of distant suburbs, which is why I bought <200m train and bus and shops and libraries/parks etc etc this year rather than some very nice houses on larger blocks say 30-40k from the CBD and not well served by public transport. I have this belief that should we all be heading towards a JH Kunstler future then there won't be any extra pain for choosing to invest now anyway, it's a skewed bet imo.
Some of the very smart people who sell PO are into land as an investment anyway, farm and timberland could be bluechip but I'm predicting the average 16 perch block should do well if we all need to learn how to cultivate victory gardens again anyhow.
You really need to do more reading... throw in some action and you could be an investor!
"This estimate is lower than the industry's. BP's oil statistics -- the industry bible -- indicate some 1,047 billion barrels of proved reserves -- 36 years supply on current usage."
"The world holds enough proved reserves for 40 years of supply ... at current consumption rates" said BP this week.
Though using current consumption rates of course means you are expecting the Chinese in 2040 to still be riding bikes!
This thread is weird. In no way is this thread talking about "inspired conversation". Except Nullagine, who's use of the word inspired has confused me to no end. Never have I ever seen such a postive word used in a manner that makes me nauseas. If you want to inspire us Nullagine, then go out there and do it, then come back and tell us all about it. If you want to be inspired then stop talking and start listening. You might actually learn something.
Love your selective work HG to suit your purpose -
I read that article too...
According to the same article from BP, nothing to worry about running out of oil since the oil reserves are being discovered at a faster pace than oil being consumed.
Moreover same researchers predicted in 1980 that they had 29 years owrth of oil reserves left ..!
You are bordering on being a liar in proving your point ... very deceitful ..!!
Harris
WASHINGTON, DC, June 21 -- BP PLC tried recently to quell renewed concerns by some industry observers that world oil reserves are running out sooner than expected.
"2003 was a turbulent year in the world's energy markets, with supply disruptions, strong growth in both demand and production of oil and coal, and the highest prices in the oil and gas markets for 20 years," said BP Chief Economist Peter Davies.
However, he said, "The high prices were not driven by fundamental resource shortages: In 2003, the world's reserves of oil and natural gas continued their long term trend of growing faster than production."
Davies's comments were part of presentations June 15 in New York City and June 16 in Washington, DC, that highlighted BP's 2003 statistical review.
"Despite those who say we are about to run out of oil and gas, the figures in the review confirm there is no shortage of reserves. Production in some provinces may have peaked, but this is no reason for current high prices," he said.
Over 40 years supply
The new data estimate total world oil reserves at 1.15 trillion bbl, about 10% higher than previously reported for 2002. Additionally, global oil reserves have increased almost continuously over the past 30 years, BP officials said. World reserves now represent 41 years of production at current rates. By comparison, in 1980 reserves equivalent to only 29 years of production were known.
The world has now produced some 80% of the oil reserves that were known in 1980; yet exploration success and application of technology has led to current reserves that are 70% higher, BP said. The company has published its statistical review of world energy for 53 years.
Looking at natural gas, BP reported global reserves of 176 trillion cu m, 13% higher than those previously reported for 2002. The company said that gas reserves have more than doubled since 1980 as a result of exploration, new technology, and the "unstranding" of gas reserves through liquefied natural gas and other technologies.
BP Group Chief Executive John Browne emphasized that oil and gas are not being depleted at an accelerated rate. "The data [illustrate] the continued growth in reserve volumes across the world," Browne wrote in the review's introduction. "At current levels of consumption, there are sufficient reserves to meet oil demand for some 40 years and to meet natural gas demand for well over 60 years."
He added that there appears to be considerable scope for proved reserves and production to keep rising in Russia and elsewhere. "Reserves, globally, have grown over time, and it is clear that the issue of energy security, which has been so prominent over the last year, is driven not by a physical shortage of supply but by the challenges of ensuring, in a world where demand and supply are not colocated, that there will be sufficient traded oil and gas to meet rising demand."
In many countries the fields have been nationalised and the reserves are state secrets.
http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch5en/appl5en/ch5a1en.html
Can you guess what happened next?
So, how do we know how much we have? It's very hard to tell...
http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch5en/appl5en/ch5a1en.html
Can you guess what happened next?
So, how do we know how much we have? It's very hard to tell...
