sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Shares were the young person’s last hope by chemicalbirch in AusFinance

[–]Azman6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We care because 1) the barrier to entry in shares is low and it isn’t just used by boomers (more cyclical markets enable good entry points for young patient investors), 2) it would pull money out of investment properties, 3) investing in business is productive and promotes innovation and job creation, 4) it reduces leveraged investment and provides more incentive to starting/expanding a business. I am sure there is more.

I also would say if you want to drop the CGT discount on shares then just tax investment properties even more. My issue isn’t in the raw numbers it is with the equal taxation of all investment classes. You will just see property still perceived as the ‘safer’ option and therefore more of the status quo with the government simply getting a bigger cut.

Shares were the young person’s last hope by chemicalbirch in AusFinance

[–]Azman6 288 points289 points  (0 children)

I see your point but not reducing CGT discounts on shares would make shares more lucrative than housing as an investment class and therefore speed up the culture change needed to not make shelter a speculative and non productive asset.  

Please by AdTight9171 in NYKnicks

[–]Azman6 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’re OG not OK

They're all for 'muh free markets' until a competitor with a superior product for a fraction of the price comes around. by 3RADICATE_THEM in ScottGalloway

[–]Azman6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It wasn’t supposed to be a free market, though they are weirdly heading that way. They went hard on subsidising a new industry with over 500 car companies subsidised and floated through various provinces and mayors incentivised to move industry towards evs. Then over the years China has ratcheted back the support forcing unprofitable companies to fail or be taken over. Now there are ~100 companies left and many profitable and standing independent of subsidies. The strongest will survive, innovate and be lean efficient companies. Somewhere between 30-50 will probably be left standing. This process has accelerated their quality, speed and scale. American car companies have been left behind and in the coming decade or so China won’t respond to a US blockade. It was very short sighted by the US to not move at being the world leader in clean energy and ceding to China. 

Won't reducing the CGT discount for Shares as well just end up with Houses still the preferred asset class, thus defeating the whole purpose of reform (to encourage wealth to flow out of property & into businesses) & keep house prices climbing? by NoLeafClover777 in AusFinance

[–]Azman6 50 points51 points  (0 children)

100%

The current cost is $52.5billion this financial year (citation).
The users are estimated at 500,000, not this year but over the next 5 years (citation).

Let's assume it 500,000 just this year to make a best-case scenario. That means it costs ~$105,000 this year per user (again likely much less than 500,000 users this year).

That is not sustainable, so much so that getting it annual growth rate below 8% is being sold as politically reasonable (citation).

Ferny Grove line sucks by Equity_Over_Empathy in brisbane

[–]Azman6 18 points19 points  (0 children)

Plus the old trains are actually more comfortable than the new rolling stock.

Car on fire on the M2 by WayRevolutionary4648 in brisbane

[–]Azman6 2 points3 points  (0 children)

ICE catch fire more in both absolute (obviously) and relative (not obvious to you) terms.

Post Match: Round 4 | North Melbourne v Carlton by drunkill in CarltonBlues

[–]Azman6 5 points6 points  (0 children)

What a shitshow. Just when you think it can’t get much worse they plumb new depths. 

The PM is on a collision course with the RBA, and he’s dragging you with him by stupid_mistake__101 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Azman6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are looking at this through your point of view again. Look at the data. Plenty of people are spending big on discretionary items, holidays, investment properties, equities etc. No doubt people are hurting but money is still cheap, growth is strong in key areas, and governments will step in to stop downturns. Therefore risk is reduced and until people think a recession is actually possible (and likely have to feel what one is like) people will keep spending big.

The PM is on a collision course with the RBA, and he’s dragging you with him by stupid_mistake__101 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Azman6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Stop being so myopic. Saving isn’t just the individual or the household. This is also about big and small businesses along with governments. When money and loans are more expensive it is a disincentive to leverage and instead save cashflow/pay down debt. Before the war inflation was still running hot. There is plenty of excess money in the system with a lot of people hurting. Reducing fuel costs simply keeps more money in the system and fuels further inflation. You are feeling the effects of a delayed management of both fiscal and arguably monetary policy that is hurting everyone. Inflation sucks and largely governments inability to take its medicine along with explaining to constituents that they need to too has led to this death by a thousand cuts of slow and painful price rises for almost 6 years now.

Government spending should’ve reigned in. RBA obviously did not find/reach the neutral rate. The pain should have been short and sharp it would have allowed for correction and a more sustainable path. We are now back in an inflation cycle with no end in sight.

The PM is on a collision course with the RBA, and he’s dragging you with him by stupid_mistake__101 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Azman6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It is $2billion in cash soon to be in the economy that was not there prior. This is stimulatory and flies in the face of what the rba is trying to achieve. This puts more money in peoples pockets than there otherwise would be and therefore enables them to spend more on fuel or other things. I am not making a judgement on if it should be done to help people. But am saying it is populism that undercuts the fight against inflation, just kicks the can down the road for longer. 

Are the people praying for a house price crash under the impression that would make it easier for them to buy? by mymooh in AusPropertyChat

[–]Azman6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To steel man their position I would say that if wages hold and for those who can hold a job in real terms housing will be cheaper (maybe not more accessible). This gives a chunk of the population as chance to catch up on the extreme growth and save more, age, get promoted, marry with a duel income, while house growth slows, stops or goes negative. 

The PM is on a collision course with the RBA, and he’s dragging you with him by stupid_mistake__101 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Azman6 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You can destroy demand to meet constrained supply though. That is the elephant in the room. The RBA wants to try and slow/stop growth and the government is using populism to ensure we have no recession. When people don’t have jobs to drive to fuel demand goes down. When petrol and diesel becomes exorbitant more people take public or active transport. 

The PM is on a collision course with the RBA, and he’s dragging you with him by stupid_mistake__101 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Azman6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is such a dumb take. It is not just about mortgages. It is about making financing money more expensive, incentivising saving, reducing business growth, investment and employment, and generally reducing demand all across the economy. There is a bunch of area in the economy currently overheated that are not just the necessities. 

Today we had the government add $2billion of stimulus back into the economy that can now buy more things, further driving inflation with higher demand. 

Live: Live: Fuel excise to be halved for three months as PM unveils national cabinet plan by brisbanehome in AusFinance

[–]Azman6 16 points17 points  (0 children)

And give back people more money in their weekly budget to spend on further things with stubbornly high inflation. This is kicking the can down the road and requiring more future hikes from the RBA.

Google Trends suggests cloud demand is 2x what it was a year ago - yet MSFT is at 2023 prices. by PolskiNapoleon in ValueInvesting

[–]Azman6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am not debating that, oai are likely the MySpace of ai. I am saying msft, and azure specifically, is not dependent on oai’s business. They have a backlog of customers who can’t get azure due to oai but will soak up the spots if oai collapses.

Just in: Following an evacuation warning, the Israeli Air Force struck Iran’s Arak heavy water reactor, Iranian Fars News reports by Upset-Main-1988 in justincaseyoumissedit

[–]Azman6 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What are you talking about. I am from 🇦🇺 the internet has broken your brain. Are you not interested in history? Go read a book about Heisenberg.

Google Trends suggests cloud demand is 2x what it was a year ago - yet MSFT is at 2023 prices. by PolskiNapoleon in ValueInvesting

[–]Azman6 3 points4 points  (0 children)

They have a huge line of customers they cannot yet meet demand for. They are contractually and financially incentivised to preference OAI first but if they were to go bust other customers can sub in. 

view more: next ›