This article is so detached from reality. Assuming someone on a $50k salary can save a quarter of it. That's $42,200 after tax. $811.53 a week. Saving a quarter leaves you with $608 a week. No one can live on that. You can’t buy a house. Rent would eat most of that. www.rnz.co.nz/news/on-the-...
Opinion - Superficially, it seems fair to tax income from all sources. Yet it could be anything but, Richard Meade writes.
Plus Jack will (most often) earn more than Jill, but Jill will live longer. I'm on a good income and I can't afford a deposit because the amount required for a deposit keeps increasing, as do all my other costs.
Was talking about this at the weekend; so much housing advice is detached from reality
There are several flats available in the near new building I live in. Friends who are homeowners are horrified to hear that advertised rents range from $570 for a studio to $770 for a 2 bedroom. Many people just don't realise how much renting costs.
Academic shill with limited grasp on reality writes article on paying rent to - with a straight face - pay rent. "Those who can't, teach" still holds true....
$50K PA is a fraction above minimum wage ($48,152 assuming a 40 hour week)
We have a broken system where the only guaranteed savings plan is a couple of rentals paid off by a renter giving long term steady income. Problem is it relies on a class of renters- investors tax benefit can outbid & inflate market to keep renters poor. Investors will loose if we make it fair
Rent would eat *all* of it if you live in any of the cities
Expect more of these detached from reality pieces as the $$$ pour in to fight CGT from those that have never paid their fair share of anything imo.
What I find stupid is that most other countries already have CGT. This idea that it’s unfair or will destroy investment is daft - it works fine in other countries and no, NZ isn’t that different.
More usually Jack has rich parents who provide equity to buy a house whereas Jill rents her whole life. Both spend the same amount on a place to live but at retirement jack has a large tax free asset while Jill has nothing. That's a far more realistic scenario than that dribble.