[deleted]
$2T in Proceeds of Corruption Removed from China and Taken to US, AUS, CAN, NL
71–80 of 174 posts
Re: $2T in Proceeds of Corruption Removed from China and Taken to US, AUS, CAN, NL
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not uncommon for it to be better financially to always rent and just invest the difference between rent and mortgage+maintenance+taxes. With interest first mortgages as they are it is generally a long time before you earn any equity at all.
This is very rarely true. The only case where I can think of where you may be right is when real estate is purchased at the top of the market and sold at the bottom. When you go to sell real estate, it doesn't matter how much equity you have in the property, you will fully collect the gain or absorb the loss resulting from the sale. Equity is usually only relevant when looking at creditworthiness.
It isn't that rare actually in major western cities. So you are betting on large increases in property value to offset the loss from front loaded interest payments to make your investment better? That's a gamble.
Re: $2T in Proceeds of Corruption Removed from China and Taken to US, AUS, CAN, NL
#73This is a relatively big problem in Australia - there has been talk of a housing bubble in Australia for the last few years which in part has been propped up by Chinese grey money buying whole apartment buildings for investment, which drives up prices (they can just dictate prices) and keeps young locals out [1]. I cannot afford a house and I have a well-paying job. The government looks the other way since building i…
There's something terribly wrong at FIRB, but unfortunately we have a Treasurer (ScoMo) either too incompetent or too conflicted to do anything about it (he used to be the 'director of policy' at the real estate institute of Australia, a lobby group).
For instance, the chairman of FIRB thought it was perfectly fine for him to take a job with the Carlyle group, a massive international foreign equity fund, while staying on a chairman of FIRB [0]. Even worse, ScoMo was totally cool with this. He's since caved to the public pressure and resigned from Carlyle.
There's also the fact that, last year, the ATO were given a bucket of money to comb through their data and find home-owners likely in breach of FIRB rules (they have all the required bits and pieces, including data-matching programmes with state revenue/land-title offices & immigration). As far as I know, the ATO did this and handed the data to FIRB. No further action after that...
Our politics has pretty much become a game of hot-potato: whoever gets in to power tries their hardest to ensure the housing bubble doesn't pop on their watch. When it does pop, it's going to be one for the history books, given how long they have kicked the can down the road. It's also pretty worrying to see state-level Chinese 'soft-power' being deployed in Australia, via our traitorous ex-politicians:
- Andrew Robb, former Minister for Trade: 'consultant' for Landbridge Group (the Chinese company that was, for some insane reason, allowed to purchase a 99 year lease of the port of Darwin)[1].
- Bob Carr, former Foreign Minister: employed by the 'Australia China Relations Institute' at UTS, an 'independent' think tank on Aus-China relations (funded by the YuHu Group, the Chinese company that bribed Senator Sam Dastyari)[2]
- Alexander Downer, former Foreign Minister and Former Opposition Leader: was appointed (but has since resigned) to the board of Huawei, the Chinese company banned as a supplier for the 'National Broadband Network' amid national security concerns [3]. Is now Australia's High Commissioner (ambassador) to the UK.
- Bunch of others we are not currently aware of...
I am by no means 'anti-China'. But Australia is at a point where it needs to have a serious conversation about how it reconciles its relationship with the US and its increasing economic dependence on China. There's also the small matter of national defence, an area thrown into disarray by the election of President Trump. But it's going to be hard to have a rational conversation, one that produces the best outcome for Australia, if half of the participants are traitorous, paid-up shills.
[0] http://www.macrobusiness.com.au/2016/09/firb-chairman-brain-...
[1] http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-30/andrew-robb-joins-chin...
[2] http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:c3JxEyT...
[3] http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-30/danby-will-the-china-c...
Re: $2T in Proceeds of Corruption Removed from China and Taken to US, AUS, CAN, NL
#74And it all poured into real estate.
Re: $2T in Proceeds of Corruption Removed from China and Taken to US, AUS, CAN, NL
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
Chinese grey money buying whole apartment buildings for investment, which drives up prices The nice thing about housing is that one can easily build a lot more of it, and it makes a great de facto investment: http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2013/05/19/exporting_hou... . The only thing stopping most municipalities from pursuing this reasonable outcome is politics and resistance from NIMBY incumbent landowners.
No. Those policies are in place because planning makes sense. Not everywhere should be tear down and build up in all conditions. How about the French quarter of New Orleans or historic districts of other cities? This argument always shows up here and is idealistic bs.
[deleted]
Re: $2T in Proceeds of Corruption Removed from China and Taken to US, AUS, CAN, NL
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
What area are you in now and what area were you looking at because your experience really doesn't match up with mine of living in Sydney.
The east (think Kensingington/Kingsford), was in the south last year.
What about somewhere like Ultimo/Glebe surely they would have housing >$30/week cheaper than your area? And be ~20 minutes commute time.
When I lived in Ultimo my rent at both places was less than half what it was for my places in Bondi or Clovelly.
Re: $2T in Proceeds of Corruption Removed from China and Taken to US, AUS, CAN, NL
#77Interesting about this on a per-capita basis. Is ~$2K per citizen a lot? I wonder what comparable #s for the US and Russia are.
(Note that with 16,000-18,000 people doing the moving, it's very large per intermediary)
Re: $2T in Proceeds of Corruption Removed from China and Taken to US, AUS, CAN, NL
#78I study at Vancouver UBC and rented a room in a house in the nearby area. I could tell that the Canadian government has started to investigate the corrupted $ because one day a government official came to "my house" and asked the information about the previous landowner. It seemed that he used the corrupted $ to buy the real estate and make more $
I'll just say if you're using house sales in Vancouver or the Bay Area to launder your money you are really moving a lot of money around. I bought a house for cash in Las Vegas after the crash and the bank never once asked where I got the funds to do so. I'm pretty sure they were supposed to.
> I bought a house for cash in Las Vegas after the crash and the bank never once asked where I got the funds to do so. I'm pretty sure they were supposed to.
Umm, no. It only. I, but that's frightening. You have a right to privacy in a private transaction like that. Where you will run in to a ton of questions is when you use a big chunk of money for a down payment on a mortgage. In that case the bank wants to make sure you didn't borrow the down payment and get in over your head.
Re: $2T in Proceeds of Corruption Removed from China and Taken to US, AUS, CAN, NL
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Those policies are in place because planning makes sense. Not everywhere should be tear down and build up in all conditions. How about the French quarter of New Orleans or historic districts of other cities? This argument always shows up here and is idealistic bs.
I don't understand
There are groups of people that seem to think that sacrificing local experience should be shoved aside solely on the basis to add more Housing should be the most important thing.
Re: $2T in Proceeds of Corruption Removed from China and Taken to US, AUS, CAN, NL
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
No. Those policies are in place because planning makes sense. Not everywhere should be tear down and build up in all conditions. How about the French quarter of New Orleans or historic districts of other cities? This argument always shows up here and is idealistic bs.
I don't understand
[deleted]