Untrue. If you invest wisely, you will most likely do well. If you invest recklessly or plan badly, anything can happen.It's not an insult. You may well have created the wealth to buy the home but the increase in the price of the home had nothing to do with you.
QED. Congrats.I'm currently selling a house. It has increased in value by €600k in the last 10 years. That's €1154 a week. I'd have to earn an extra €2400 a week to net that sort of money.
During the same period my pension increased in value by €400k without me putting a cent into it.
Untrue.That's an increase of a million Euro in net wealth without me contributing anything towards it.
And lots of people with more wealth than you back then have lost out in the meantime. There's always a fair degree of survivorship bias in these "my property/pension fund has quadrupled in value" stories.People who don't have capital (wealth) have no chance of making that sort of gain.
Okay, so you're opposed to what you think will happen to the proposal, got it.I'm opposed to it because on the basis of 30+ years experience, I know with reasonably certainty how it would play out in the medium/longer term.
Owning a house and having a passively managed diversified pension fund isn't "investing wisely". Getting a return of 100% over 10 years is luck.Untrue. If you invest wisely, you will most likely do well. If you invest recklessly or plan badly, anything can happen.
No, it's true.Untrue.
Lots of people lost money on property and pensions during a decade of QE? I find that hard to believe.And lots of people with more wealth than you back then have lost out in the meantime. There's always a fair degree of survivorship bias in these "my property/pension fund has quadrupled in value" stories.
And it hasn't dawned on you that these are the same people by and large who are property owners?Based on my 30+ years of experience I see income taxes being concentrated more and more on a small group of earners with no consideration to their actual wealth. I see a continuous conflation of the terms wealth and income to the stage where they seem to be interchangeable now. I know with reasonable certainty that until we change that narrative that problem (and yes, I see it as a problem) will only get worse.
It's a lot wiser than the opposite.Owning a house and having a passively managed diversified pension fund isn't "investing wisely".
Untrue, unless you contributed nothing to your pension during that time.No, it's true.
Yes. The country is full of crumbling properties less than 20 years old. And plenty of people unwisely crystallised pension losses around 2010 by sticking their funds into cash and they're still there.Lots of people lost money on property and pensions during a decade of QE? I find that hard to believe.
Yep, they are also the same people who got the gains from property price inflation.And it hasn't dawned on you that these are the same people by and large who are property owners?
After all, the burden of a higher property tax falls predominantly on the same people who are paying, or who have previously paid, the bulk of income tax.
I think you are confusing wisdom with luck.It's a lot wiser than the opposite.
I already said that I put nothing into it during that time.Untrue, unless you contributed nothing to your pension during that time.
The State will be picking up the tab for that.Yes. The country is full of crumbling properties less than 20 years old.
Plenty or lots? How many lost money on property during that time?And plenty of people unwisely crystallised pension losses around 2010 by sticking their funds into cash and they're still there.
Calling a poster delusional is fairly insulting.It's not an insult. You may well have created the wealth to buy the home but the increase in the price of the home had nothing to do with you.
I'm currently selling a house. It has increased in value by €600k in the last 10 years. That's €1154 a week. I'd have to earn an extra €2400 a week to net that sort of money.
During the same period my pension increased in value by €400k without me putting a cent into it. That's an increase of a million Euro in net wealth without me contributing anything towards it. People who don't have capital (wealth) have no chance of making that sort of gain.
And...?Yep, they are also the same people who got the gains from property price inflation.
No, I'm not as my comment confirms.I think you are confusing wisdom with luck.
You did contribute the initial capital? Or did your fund create itself?I already said that I put nothing into it during that time.
Not for all of them, I'm sure. Not even for a decent proportion of them I'd wager. After all if you neglect a relatively new property and leave it empty and unmaintained for a decade or longer, the State won't be a blind bit interested in compensating you, nor should it be.The State will be picking up the tab for that.
? (nitpicking?)Plenty or lots?
A lot of them, although many or most of these losses won't have crystallised. Every rural town in the country has too many of these places. They are obviously worth less than their original cost.How many lost money on property during that time?
If so then I apologies.Calling a poster delusional is fairly insulting.
No, I'm proposing less of a transfer from those who work but don't have capital from those who have capital whether they work or not. If that latter group don't have the income to pay that transfer it can be deferred until their die and taken from their estate."People who don't have capital (wealth) have no chance of making that sort of gain." So are you proposing more transfers from those who work and have capital to those who don't work or have capital?
I agree completely. That's why I'm in favour of wealth taxes and less income taxes because wealth and income are not the same thing.All in all taxes which assist social stability, more benefit for more work etc. are good for society.
Short term, not fully thought through gains have a way of playing out badly.
And what?And...?
Eh?No, I'm not as my comment confirms.
I contributed nothing during the time the fund doubled in value.You did contribute the initial capital? Or did your fund create itself?
Are you?Not for all of them, I'm sure.
You started? (nitpicking?)
During the last 10 years though. That's the time I'm talking about.A lot of them, although many or most of these losses won't have crystallised. Every rural town in the country has too many of these places. They are obviously worth less than their original cost.
You did contribute previously though, so the fund was of course well positioned to grow at that point, in the absence of wars, disasters, economic collapses etc. Which was very wise of you.I contributed nothing during the time the fund doubled in value.
Of course the fact that equities and Irish property were both in almost unprecedented slump 10 years ago has nothing with your focus on the 10 years? Indeed, a lot of these properties deteriorated in the past decade. That's what happens when places are poorly managed.During the last 10 years though. That's the time I'm talking about.
The gain was due to the political decision to print money after the last recession. As I doubt anyone from the Fed or ECB seeks out my posts here for guidance (or anyone else if they've any sense) I can't say that I influenced that decision. Therefore it was right place at the right time stuff.You did contribute previously though, so the fund was of course well positioned to grow at that point, in the absence of wars, disasters, economic collapses etc. Which was very wise of you.
Oh it has but those who didn't have capital in the last 10 years have been left behind in the wealth stakes and they are mostly the younger people who will have to pay the QE bill, one way or the other. They are the ones trying to buy a house and start a family now. Real wage growth has been less than 1% per year up until this year. During the same period we more than doubled the amount of money in the world. That means we've halved the value of waged relative to capital during that time. I find that unfair on those starting out in life who are working. I certainly didn't face the same disadvantages. That's mainly down to luck. I did buy an apartment in 1996 because of the impending EMU and the interest rate reductions that came with it. The rest was luck.Of course the fact that equities and Irish property were both in almost unprecedented slump 10 years ago has nothing to do with this.
To me wealth built from taxed income is a derivative of income, just put into bricks and mortar rather than the bank.I agree completely. That's why I'm in favour of wealth taxes and less income taxes because wealth and income are not the same thing.
We all did contribute though via bank bailouts and austerity though, so in an extremely roundabout way we have contributedTherefore it was right place at the right time stuff.
We pay DIRT tax at 33%. I'm not proposing anything that punitive.To me wealth built from taxed income is a derivative of income, just put into bricks and mortar rather than the bank.
With interest rates rising would you propose a similar punitive tax on savings?
Well most of that was borrowed but QE is a different thing and the Bank Bailout was a bailout of bond holders (pension funds etc and depositors) but for the bit your did contribute thanks!We all did contribute though via bank bailouts and austerity though, so in an extremely roundabout way we have contributed
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?