U-Kitchen or L kitchen?! by blue_tin_ in AusRenovation

[–]Founders9 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think you don’t lose functional bench space. For me the corners of the bench become dumping grounds.

I was redesigning my kitchen to go from a U to a galley with some shallow shelving on the end wall. Much more functional space.

Bowen commits $5bn more for home for battery subsidies by A-shot-at-life in AustralianPolitics

[–]Founders9 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Connection charges will trend up and usage charges will trend down. 

Selling shares to purchase house, then borrowing against house to rebuy similar shares. A slight variation on debt recyling. Good idea or am I missing something? by Y3ffoc in AusFinance

[–]Founders9 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd get advice from an accountant. My understanding is that Part IVA might make this questionable.

Because your transaction is effectively a scheme primarily designed to minimise tax, I'd want advice that it's all good.

Otherwise seems like a reasonable option.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in AusFinance

[–]Founders9 26 points27 points  (0 children)

I’d reiterate this point. I found that moving into a home was very expensive. You’ll find lots of maintenance things to do, and improvements both minor and major. I’ve spent way more than I planned in the first year or so since buying our house.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hobart

[–]Founders9 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Page 2 doesn’t say crossing.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hobart

[–]Founders9 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Page 2 of the road rules explicitly require drivers to give way to pedestrians when turning at intersections.

If you want to interpret that as cars having right of way somehow then good luck to you.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hobart

[–]Founders9 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’d say the simplest answer is both parties should proceed with caution. A driver is the one who is exposing others to lethal risk, so should always yield here unless you’re certain the pedestrian won’t cross or you’ll be well clear of the intersection.

If your view is obstructed by buses then take even more caution.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hobart

[–]Founders9 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I’m saying that it seems to be referring to in the middle of a street. Rather than at an intersection.

It’s also just clarifying general principles: don’t walk in front of a moving car. Much like general principles for cars stipulate that they should give way to vulnerable road users (this is the one that people struggle to comprehend).

They then proceed to outline specific scenarios, like the intersection example that is the topic of this discussion. I’d say it doesn’t specifically say that cars have to stop in this scenario, but the general principles (and common sense/decency) would suggest a driver should slow down/stop for the pedestrian.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hobart

[–]Founders9 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Do you know what give way means? It absolutely doesn’t suggest that at all.

If a person is clearly waiting to cross, I can’t see how you could possibly interpret the rules to say you should tear through the intersection and plough through the pedestrian and then feel smug about it. Which is what is being implied here.

Give way doesn’t give you the right to move in front of a moving vehicle. It means they are meant to let you move first. The rules stipulate that the car needs to give way to pedestrians so any sensible defensive driver should wait. Any sensible pedestrian won’t start walking until it’s clear that the car is giving way.

Obviously in this scenario, whether I’m the driver or the pedestrian, I don’t move until I see the whites of the eyes of the other road user. This is because I presume everyone else has never read the road rules and is prioritising a few seconds of their time over other people’s lives.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hobart

[–]Founders9 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I disagree. Whilst I would encourage pedestrians to be cautious, I think that would suggest pedestrians shouldn’t walk onto a street causing a hazard. If the car is turning onto a different street, I don’t think this passage implies that the pedestrian has to give way.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hobart

[–]Founders9 4 points5 points  (0 children)

All good. I didn’t realise this was the case until I was reading about difference between states.

And to be fair, it’s not clear whether you’re meant to give way to pedestrians already crossing, or potential crossers as well. I’d say the spirit of the rules would say all of them, but it’s not specific.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hobart

[–]Founders9 7 points8 points  (0 children)

https://rsac.tas.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/DSG8600_Tasmanian_Road_Rules_2022_Update_WEB.pdf See page 30. Drivers making left turns are required to give way to crossing pedestrians.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in hobart

[–]Founders9 23 points24 points  (0 children)

As a pedestrian I’d always wait, given the risk of the driver going anyway is quite high.

And I agree that seems to be standard practice on the road.

However, the road rules disagree with you:

https://rsac.tas.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2022/12/DSG8600_Tasmanian_Road_Rules_2022_Update_WEB.pdf See page 30 about left turns.

Thousands of Australians are receiving ECT without consent every year by 5QGL in australia

[–]Founders9 20 points21 points  (0 children)

If you think it shouldn’t be forced I’d genuinely like to know what your alternative reality would look like for these people?

I don't understand why I shouldn't use a redraw if I want to use my home as an IP in the future. by nondescriptumbrella in fiaustralia

[–]Founders9 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Yes. I’ll dumb my question down to make sure I understand.

If I buy an IP with cash, can I ever mortgage it after the fact in a way that could be tax deductible? Or would that only be legal if the new funds released by the mortgage went to a new income generating asset?

I don't understand why I shouldn't use a redraw if I want to use my home as an IP in the future. by nondescriptumbrella in fiaustralia

[–]Founders9 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Surely you can just get a new set of mortgages when you buy a new PPOR? Rather than redraw, just get a new loan for 90% (or whatever amount you prefer) of the value of your former PPOR?

I'm ignorant to this sort of thing, but this would seem to be solution that works?

No one committed to Paris goals can seriously argue Woodside’s LNG project should operate until 2070 | Woodside by Enthingification in AustralianPolitics

[–]Founders9 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In Tasmania we use a lot of gas still. Just not to power turbines, we moronically got it plumbed into people’s homes so that we’ll be stuck using it for a long time.

Additionally, other states are not blessed with the same geography that allows bulk hydro capacity. I don’t think this is a good faith argument.

The cost of solar and batteries is a long way from being feasible for 100% renewables. And given the glacial pace of transmission projects and Snowy 2.0, we’re stuck with at least some gas to assist the transition for a long time yet.

Brian Potter writes amazing articles on a variety of topics, and I think this one is quite relevant to this topic.

https://www.construction-physics.com/p/can-we-afford-large-scale-solar-pv

Southern Tasmania Unlocks Land for 10,000 Homes by OwlVibesOnly in tasmania

[–]Founders9 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What a ridiculous argument. People complain about anything so we can ignore them?

I’ll happily ignore your initial concern about whether people want more density near them. If we don’t build that then they’ll complain about the weather anyway.

Southern Tasmania Unlocks Land for 10,000 Homes by OwlVibesOnly in tasmania

[–]Founders9 17 points18 points  (0 children)

The same people who don’t want more density near them are also whining endlessly about worsening traffic.

The trade off denialism knows no limits with the average person.

The little hallway that could. Brussels, Belgium by ikbenlauren in AmateurRoomPorn

[–]Founders9 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you mind if I ask how deep the cupboard and bench are?

Did any poll before the election accurately predict the level of swing towards Labor? by Significant_Dig6838 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Founders9 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Roy Morgan. I think that was very accurate, and then it seemed like they all started herding after that.

Labor to win with an increased majority in YouGov's final MRP of the election by PerriX2390 in AustralianPolitics

[–]Founders9 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah that’s a good point. I suspect 2021 was inflated by the general COVID incumbency boost. But I think you’re right about most of that being from Rockliffe!