No more first home owners grant

[The Mad Hughesy]

Our fantastic premier has decided that the best way to help the states finances and help struggling families is to scrap the $7000 first home owners grant, unless you build a new home.

Thanks mate, your doing a Stella job! My sister in law lost her job, both my brother and I are very much in line to get hit by his axe, and my girlfriend is worried for her job aswell...but hey she is only a nurse so not considered front line in newmans eyes.

[bootyinblue]

Reserving my judgement till the budget is handed down. If there is robbing from Peter to pay Paul and it all balances out for the average family then its not such a bad thing, but if its just robbing, robbing, and more robbing, then he is going to be signing his own termination papers I think.

[crazywalrus]

Our fantastic premier has decided that the best way to help the states finances and help struggling families is to scrap the $7000 first home owners grant, unless you build a new home.

Thanks mate, your doing a Stella job! My sister in law lost her job, both my brother and I are very much in line to get hit by his axe, and my girlfriend is worried for her job aswell...but hey she is only a nurse so not considered front line in newmans eyes.

Hey Chris sorry to hear about your families loss of jobs. I assume that they all worked for the state government. It is a tough time for the public service at the moment. I do not think you can lay the blame totally on the current government. Even the previous governments treasury brief to the incoming/potential government made reference to the explosion in the public service and the dept level being unheard of and in uncharted waters.

With regard to the first home owners grant. I am of the opinion that the government should not get involved in this sort of stimulation. It encourages the wrong behaviour. A couple of years ago there where stimulus for people to get into property. I think it was up to $15,000 for a period. At the time the Real estate industry was dead. This created an artificial run on housing which created a jump in value of 15% in the market. So a person got the $15000 from the government and paid up to $65,000 more for the property. I know this did not apply to everybody but not all people are discerning. People do not always make the correct decisions when they think they can get some money back from the government. I think it has been shown that quite a number to the people that got into the property market at that time are under difficulty now with their properties less value than when they bought them and now have no equity in their loans.

At the end of the day if you need $7000 to get into property than you are probably not ready to buy a property. Sorry to take an opposite stance on this mate and I do feel for you predicament.

[daveylad]

I think hes going at it a bit too fast and head on, thats Newman. But the fault clearly lies with the Bligh and her govt. Just like budgeting at home cant sustain spending without the money coming in, Dams, Railways Hospitals wage software, all contributing to the mess. Really sorry about the family losing there jobs and hope it comes good, just slow down campbell and take that stupid smile off your face when you announce things like job cuts it dosent look good.

[crazywalrus]

I think hes going at it a bit too fast and head on, thats Newman. But the fault clearly lies with the Bligh and her govt. Just like budgeting at home cant sustain spending without the money coming in, Dams, Railways Hospitals wage software, all contributing to the mess. Really sorry about the family losing there jobs and hope it comes good, just slow down campbell and take that stupid smile off your face when you announce things like job cuts it dosent look good.

Have to agree with this Dave - I think it is a little political at present.

[bootyinblue]

Do you think he has the good of the QLD people at the forefront of his mind in making these decisions though?

I mean, if you are not making or taking steps to make the majority of the people of QLD happy then your career will be a short one. Wont it?

[JarrydA]

I assume that they all worked for the state government. It is a tough time for the public service at the moment. I do not think you can lay the blame totally on the current government. Even the previous governments treasury brief to the incoming/potential government made reference to the explosion in the public service and the dept level being unheard of and in uncharted waters.

It is obvious that blame can be put on the previous administration for some of it, but newman has made very bad choices. The sacking of thousands may be saving money in the short term, but the loss of productivity along with the strikes brought on by the threat of job losses is also costing alot of money. They are sacking people in key positions, causing massive drops in overall productivity of many different government bodies.

A simpler way to tackle this in my view would have been to put a stop employment and fill all positions internally.

With regard to the first home owners grant. I am of the opinion that the government should not get involved in this sort of stimulation. It encourages the wrong behaviour. A couple of years ago there where stimulus for people to get into property. I think it was up to $15,000 for a period. At the time the Real estate industry was dead. This created an artificial run on housing which created a jump in value of 15% in the market. So a person got the $15000 from the government and paid up to $65,000 more for the property. I know this did not apply to everybody but not all people are discerning. People do not always make the correct decisions when they think they can get some money back from the government. I think it has been shown that quite a number to the people that got into the property market at that time are under difficulty now with their properties less value than when they bought them and now have no equity in their loans.

At the end of the day if you need $7000 to get into property than you are probably not ready to buy a property. Sorry to take an opposite stance on this mate and I do feel for you predicament.

I agree with this Ted.

[Baptism]

I've had experience with this sort of government.

they will do anything to get the budget back in "balance"...

with the exception of cutting their own salaries.

Although I dont agree with how Bligh and the government spent a lot, being schooled in economics and finance, it was not a bad decision.

It is common for governments to spend in time of recession to build up infrastructure for 2 main reasons:

1. helps keep people in their jobs, thus reducing the unemployment rates during recessionary times.

2. emerging from the recession with proper infrastructure would enable the state to make the most of available opportunities.

However, the state was run at a deficit for too long; thus reserves were drained.

Newman was doing the right thing in wanted to cut down on expenses, but was overzealous in doing so. He incited the wrath of many unions and voters when he went back on his words about cutting jobs.

I would have done it slightly differently; putting a pay freeze and gradually reducing the number of contract workers giving them ample time to find another job.

What he doesnt realise is that by cutting large numbers of jobs he is also affecting government revenue by way of income taxes and subsequently unemployment benefits.

Just my thoughts on the issue, my apologies if I have offended anyone.

Regards,

Adrian

[The Mad Hughesy]

Nah it's all good Ted. I'm not out to spark a debate with anyone, I'm just having a whinge on my own behalf lol just venting

I got no beef with someone who had a diff opinion to me, got better things to worry about in life without making mountains out of molehills. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion

[crazywalrus]

Do you think he has the good of the QLD people at the forefront of his mind in making these decisions though?

I mean, if you are not making or taking steps to make the majority of the people of QLD happy then your career will be a short one. Wont it?

Jury is out on his reasoning. I do think it is political the reason for the rush.

I do not believe politicians should make policy on whether they are going to be liked and get back in.

I've had experience with this sort of government.

they will do anything to get the budget back in "balance"...

with the exception of cutting their own salaries.

Although I dont agree with how Bligh and the government spent a lot, being schooled in economics and finance, it was not a bad decision.

It is common for governments to spend in time of recession to build up infrastructure for 2 main reasons:

1. helps keep people in their jobs, thus reducing the unemployment rates during recessionary times.

2. emerging from the recession with proper infrastructure would enable the state to make the most of available opportunities.

However, the state was run at a deficit for too long; thus reserves were drained.

Newman was doing the right thing in wanted to cut down on expenses, but was overzealous in doing so. He incited the wrath of many unions and voters when he went back on his words about cutting jobs.

I would have done it slightly differently; putting a pay freeze and gradually reducing the number of contract workers giving them ample time to find another job.

What he doesn't realise is that by cutting large numbers of jobs he is also affecting government revenue by way of income taxes and subsequently unemployment benefits.

Just my thoughts on the issue, my apologies if I have offended anyone.

Regards,

Adrian

I understand the economic basis for spending in hard times and saving in good times (simple explanation) however the previous government made some very bad decisions and ran in deficit for too long. I am probably a little more conservative and would have attacked this process of stimulus in different ways.

I agree that the method that the present government has taken is a little overzealous. Personally I would not be concerned with upsetting a Union. But that is just my background and this will only take this thread off course so I will not comment further.

I take issue to the current process of cuts like this. My Neighbour is a career public servant and 55 years old and level AO6. His wife is 62 and a Level A05 with two teenage kids. She has lost her job and he had to reapply for his job and was successful. The problem I have is that these long term Public Servants have worked all their lives with the belief that they had a safe job which has now been legislated away. At 55 and 62 you are not going to get another job in the private sector. These professional people have been paid below the private sector rate due to this job security. If this is taken way than the pay level is not commensurate.

When you contract you are receiving a higher income for the temporary nature of your contract. I do not think the government owed these people anything. The Staff is where I believe they deserved a better process. Bligh did the voluntary redundancies with the golden handshake however only managed a reduction of 5 or 6000. I do not think there is any argument from both sides of politics that the public service needs to be reduced as the states revenue does not support this overhead. I do however think that they should have staged the process a little.

With regard to reducing governments income, income tax and unemployment benefits are federal issues not state. I do agree that another 15,000 people out of work on an average wage of $60,000 will have an effect on the economy and reduce dollars going around in the state's economy.

[straddiebrad]

i agree with ted ,i just mist out on the grant when it first started,didnt need it but it would have been nice to get it,but if you bank on getting the grant your most likly not ready for a home loan anyway.brad

[bootyinblue]

'I do not believe politicians should make policy on whether they are going to be liked and get back in.'

I couldnt cut this bit out from all the rest so just copied it.

But Ted, how else do they get voted in or back in then? They be seen to be doing the right thing by the people, people like them (or dislike them the least) and vote for them.

It may be a simplistic way of looking at things, but I think its how it is. They appeal to the masses with what they do to hopefully attain or retain their vote.

[The Mad Hughesy]

i agree with ted ,i just mist out on the grant when it first started,didnt need it but it would have been nice to get it,but if you bank on getting the grant your most likly not ready for a home loan anyway.brad

Agreed. If ur relying on the grant to purchase ur first house, then your not ready. For me it was just a nice bonus to look foward to than anything else

[bootyinblue]

i agree with ted ,i just mist out on the grant when it first started,didnt need it but it would have been nice to get it,but if you bank on getting the grant your most likly not ready for a home loan anyway.brad

I too missed out on all the Government grants. I purchased my first place with my fathers backing and he was also listed on the mortgage and therefore as he already owned property 'we' were not entitled to any grants. I re-mortgaged the property 18 months later as agreed to remove him from the papers and as I had 'already owned' a property (the same one, just going soley under my name now) I again was not eligible for a grant.

I guess thats just how the cookie crumbles, felt dudded twice but atleast had the leg up and support from family to break into the housing market and lucky to do it where and when I did.

[crazywalrus]

i agree with ted ,i just mist out on the grant when it first started,didnt need it but it would have been nice to get it,but if you bank on getting the grant your most likly not ready for a home loan anyway.brad

Agreed. If ur relying on the grant to purchase ur first house, then your not ready. For me it was just a nice bonus to look foward to than anything else

The funny thing is i reckon the grant is factored into the price anyway when you buy, especially when buying from a house and land place. I bought in 95 and I missed out on the sales tax rebate for new home buyers because the house was deemed to be too expensive for a first home buyer. The rebate cut out at $150,000 and we bought for $153,000 that really sucked.

[Baptism]

Here is the trouble of their cutting of contract workers.

I have several mates in the public sector and their bosses (been in their jobs for 20+ years) were put in charge of cutting jobs.

Yes, they are cutting contract workers; but what many people do not know is that rather than letting the contract worker finish their job, they are paying them out for the rest of their contract. i.e. if their contract is due in 8 months, rather than letting them finish their job and paying them for it. they are "fired" and paid the full remaining sum contracted for.

I see how this reduces the amount of jobs, but no way does it affect revenues as they are still paying out the contract workers!

Seems he is more concerned about reducing the amount of people working rather than revenue effects to me.

[crazywalrus]

'I do not believe politicians should make policy on whether they are going to be liked and get back in.'

I couldnt cut this bit out from all the rest so just copied it.

But Ted, how else do they get voted in or back in then? They be seen to be doing the right thing by the people, people like them (or dislike them the least) and vote for them.

It may be a simplistic way of looking at things, but I think its how it is. They appeal to the masses with what they do to hopefully attain or retain their vote.

I essence I do not disagree. The problem with the current system is that we have 3 year terms. A lot of governments do not make the hard decisions for the long term as there is every chance they will not be in office. I do not mean to upset people here but I do think that a lot of the voting public make decisions based on knowledge and policy. They take a much more selfish approach to it where by "what is in it for me?" I think hard decisions need to be made buy the current state government and this is the mandate they have been given.

[crazywalrus]

Here is the trouble of their cutting of contract workers.

I have several mates in the public sector and their bosses (been in their jobs for 20+ years) were put in charge of cutting jobs.

Yes, they are cutting contract workers; but what many people do not know is that rather than letting the contract worker finish their job, they are paying them out for the rest of their contract. i.e. if their contract is due in 8 months, rather than letting them finish their job and paying them for it. they are "fired" and paid the full remaining sum contracted for.

I see how this reduces the amount of jobs, but no way does it affect revenues as they are still paying out the contract workers!

Seems he is more concerned about reducing the amount of people working rather than revenue effects to me.

Are you sure about this? Seems like a funny thing to do if they are paying them out. I will check with some of my friends in the Service and get their comment.

[The Mad Hughesy]

Here is the trouble of their cutting of contract workers.

I have several mates in the public sector and their bosses (been in their jobs for 20+ years) were put in charge of cutting jobs.

Yes, they are cutting contract workers; but what many people do not know is that rather than letting the contract worker finish their job, they are paying them out for the rest of their contract. i.e. if their contract is due in 8 months, rather than letting them finish their job and paying them for it. they are "fired" and paid the full remaining sum contracted for.

I see how this reduces the amount of jobs, but no way does it affect revenues as they are still paying out the contract workers!

Seems he is more concerned about reducing the amount of people working rather than revenue effects to me.

Are you sure about this? Seems like a funny thing to do if they are paying them out. I will check with some of my friends in the Service and get their comment.

Yeah I was gonna say all 35+ that left here stayed until their contract finished, I haven't heard of them being paid out to leave from any department

[straddiebrad]

i agree with ted ,i just mist out on the grant when it first started,didnt need it but it would have been nice to get it,but if you bank on getting the grant your most likly not ready for a home loan anyway.brad

I too missed out on all the Government grants. I purchased my first place with my fathers backing and he was also listed on the mortgage and therefore as he already owned property 'we' were not entitled to any grants. I re-mortgaged the property 18 months later as agreed to remove him from the papers and as I had 'already owned' a property (the same one, just going soley under my name now) I again was not eligible for a grant.

I guess thats just how the cookie crumbles, felt dudded twice but atleast had the leg up and support from family to break into the housing market and lucky to do it where and when I did.

we were in the same boat as you as we had my wifes parents on ours for the first 5 years.

[madmullet]

Our fantastic premier has decided that the best way to help the states finances and help struggling families is to scrap the $7000 first home owners grant, unless you build a new home.

Thanks mate, your doing a Stella job! My sister in law lost her job, both my brother and I are very much in line to get hit by his axe, and my girlfriend is worried for her job aswell...but hey she is only a nurse so not considered front line in newmans eyes.

At the end of the day if you need $7000 to get into property than you are probably not ready to buy a property. Sorry to take an opposite stance on this mate and I do feel for you predicament.

I don’t agree on this comment. we bought our house nearly 2 yrs ago. we saved our little bums of to get the $15k for a deposit, and believe me, if it wasn’t for the 7k first home buyers grant there would have been that initiative

so when are you ready to buy a house, who says that one person is or isn’t ready cause you can’t do without the first home buyers grant

I think it gives people initiative to save for a house ( like us )

That 7k we got, got us to our dream of buying our own house and that one step easier

How can anyone judge if a person needs or doesn’t need the grant.........???????? what puts you in the category to have it, or not to have it........??????????? if you show you can save to buy a house, then why not get it.

[faulked]

i agree with ted ,i just mist out on the grant when it first started,didnt need it but it would have been nice to get it,but if you bank on getting the grant your most likly not ready for a home loan anyway.brad

I too missed out on all the Government grants. I purchased my first place with my fathers backing and he was also listed on the mortgage and therefore as he already owned property 'we' were not entitled to any grants. I re-mortgaged the property 18 months later as agreed to remove him from the papers and as I had 'already owned' a property (the same one, just going soley under my name now) I again was not eligible for a grant.

I guess thats just how the cookie crumbles, felt dudded twice but atleast had the leg up and support from family to break into the housing market and lucky to do it where and when I did.

identical to my story greg

[Gary_C]

Our fantastic premier has decided that the best way to help the states finances and help struggling families is to scrap the $7000 first home owners grant, unless you build a new home.

Thanks mate, your doing a Stella job! My sister in law lost her job, both my brother and I are very much in line to get hit by his axe, and my girlfriend is worried for her job aswell...but hey she is only a nurse so not considered front line in newmans eyes.

At the end of the day if you need $7000 to get into property than you are probably not ready to buy a property. Sorry to take an opposite stance on this mate and I do feel for you predicament.

I don’t agree on this comment. we bought our house nearly 2 yrs ago. we saved our little bums of to get the $15k for a deposit, and believe me, if it wasn’t for the 7k first home buyers grant there would have been that initiative

so when are you ready to buy a house, who says that one person is or isn’t ready cause you can’t do without the first home buyers grant

I think it gives people initiative to save for a house ( like us )

That 7k we got, got us to our dream of buying our own house and that one step easier

How can anyone judge if a person needs or doesn’t need the grant.........???????? what puts you in the category to have it, or not to have it........??????????? if you show you can save to buy a house, then why not get it.

I think that the guys were implying that a government grant just creates a "bubble." When I arrived in 2009, the insulation scheme was the big thing. When they were first considering it, they brought in a panel of installers and manufacturers. The question that the government asked was, "What is the average cost for installing insulation into a house."

The answer they were given was, "The average install is about $1200."

The government then decided that they would offer up to $1600 in grants. The very next day the average cost for installation was $1500.

The US had an ambassador way back in the day who said something along the lines of "When people realize they can vote themselves money, democracy will fail." (Sorry, just too lazy to look up the actual quote at the moment). The ambassador was Benjamin Franklin.

[shortie]

Our fantastic premier has decided that the best way to help the states finances and help struggling families is to scrap the $7000 first home owners grant, unless you build a new home.

Thanks mate, your doing a Stella job! My sister in law lost her job, both my brother and I are very much in line to get hit by his axe, and my girlfriend is worried for her job aswell...but hey she is only a nurse so not considered front line in newmans eyes.

At the end of the day if you need $7000 to get into property than you are probably not ready to buy a property. Sorry to take an opposite stance on this mate and I do feel for you predicament.

I don’t agree on this comment. we bought our house nearly 2 yrs ago. we saved our little bums of to get the $15k for a deposit, and believe me, if it wasn’t for the 7k first home buyers grant there would have been that initiative

so when are you ready to buy a house, who says that one person is or isn’t ready cause you can’t do without the first home buyers grant

I think it gives people initiative to save for a house ( like us )

That 7k we got, got us to our dream of buying our own house and that one step easier

How can anyone judge if a person needs or doesn’t need the grant.........???????? what puts you in the category to have it, or not to have it........??????????? if you show you can save to buy a house, then why not get it.

I think you missed the entire point of the grant Kurt.

It wasnt put in place to help people afford their own home is was put inplace to stimulate the housing sector.

Trust me they wernt thinking about you buying your dream when it was put in place.

ITs not up to the governemnt to help people afford their own home.

[madmullet]

Our fantastic premier has decided that the best way to help the states finances and help struggling families is to scrap the $7000 first home owners grant, unless you build a new home.

Thanks mate, your doing a Stella job! My sister in law lost her job, both my brother and I are very much in line to get hit by his axe, and my girlfriend is worried for her job aswell...but hey she is only a nurse so not considered front line in newmans eyes.

At the end of the day if you need $7000 to get into property than you are probably not ready to buy a property. Sorry to take an opposite stance on this mate and I do feel for you predicament.

I don’t agree on this comment. we bought our house nearly 2 yrs ago. we saved our little bums of to get the $15k for a deposit, and believe me, if it wasn’t for the 7k first home buyers grant there would have been that initiative

so when are you ready to buy a house, who says that one person is or isn’t ready cause you can’t do without the first home buyers grant

I think it gives people initiative to save for a house ( like us )

That 7k we got, got us to our dream of buying our own house and that one step easier

How can anyone judge if a person needs or doesn’t need the grant.........???????? what puts you in the category to have it, or not to have it........??????????? if you show you can save to buy a house, then why not get it.

I think you missed the entire point of the grant Kurt.

It wasnt put in place to help people afford their own home is was put inplace to stimulate the housing sector.

Trust me they wernt thinking about you buying your dream when it was put in place.

ITs not up to the governemnt to help people afford their own home.

well they stimulated me ( help me afford )

[The Mad Hughesy]

Sure won't stimulate me lol

[crazywalrus]

It is great you managed to make the most of the grant Kurt. The main point of the statement was in the text before that was not quoted. The situation was that a lot of first home buyers paid a lot more for their houses because of the stimulus package. A lot of buyers scrambled to buy a property and take advantage of the grant before it stopped. What they did not factor in was that this stimulus put the price of a home up buy %15 in a lot of cases. If we take a price of $300,000 for the home the increase was $45,000. So if you are happy with paying an extra $45,000 to get the grant and get your first home than that is great. The problem is that straight after the stimulus finished the property market adjusted back. So the deposit of say $15,000 + $7000 to use your example, and than the property went back the inflated $45,000, a lot of folk where left with no equity in their loans.

I also think that a lot of people that jumped into the market where probably not ready for the commitment of a home loan and without the stimulus package would not have got the home loan. These people now find themselves in a world of pain and in financial difficulty. This does not apply to everybody and obviously not to your situation Kurt.

Stimulus is a tricky thing and I do not think it has been well done to date and well managed. These are just my opinions and there are always exceptions to everything.

[WayneD]

I don't agree that it raised the price of houses at all. When I was saving for a home in 2000-2001 the average house price was $150K at where I was looking (Calamvale). Then the first home owners grant came in and I ended up being able to afford building new in Drewvale (5 minutes from Calamvale) at a cost of $172K. Who wouldn't want a new house over a 10year old one for only $22K more of which the good old gubberment paid $14K and the developer gave $5K rebate on the land for landscaping as it was a new estate they wanted to make look pretty so they could sell all the blocks.

Honestly, I didn't even know that the first home owners grant was still going. Very surprised.

Right now my house is on the market for $455K (rubs hands together smiling greedily) not that it really matters as I am buying and selling in the same market (and getting divorced :whistle: )

[crazywalrus]

I don't agree that it raised the price of houses at all. When I was saving for a home in 2000-2001 the average house price was $150K at where I was looking (Calamvale). Then the first home owners grant came in and I ended up being able to afford building new in Drewvale (5 minutes from Calamvale) at a cost of $172K. Who wouldn't want a new house over a 10year old one for only $22K more of which the good old gubberment paid $14K and the developer gave $5K rebate on the land for landscaping as it was a new estate they wanted to make look pretty so they could sell all the blocks.

Honestly, I didn't even know that the first home owners grant was still going. Very surprised.

Right now my house is on the market for $455K (rubs hands together smiling greedily) not that it really matters as I am buying and selling in the same market (and getting divorced :whistle: )

My Brother is in real estate in the Redland area and they definitely saw a jump in prices as people scrambled to buy a property coming up to the end of that grant period. The %15 comes from him. I also heard the same thing from other agents which are customers of mine. This only effected the first home owner market. I am not sure of the effect back in 2000/2001 I was commenting on the last few years stimulus packages.

I feel your pain with the divorce thing I did not sell just took a huge mortgage to buy the witch out. opps did i really say that?

[daveylad]

Lets not forget we live in a democracy

The definition of Democracy: Where any two idiots can outvote a genius. :whistle:

[shortie]

Well I for 1 like seeing the current Government doing whats right for QLD and not whats popular.

[WayneD]

I feel your pain with the divorce thing I did not sell just took a huge mortgage to buy the witch out. opps did i really say that?

Sooooo glad my divorce is amicable and I am getting a "fair share" of the profits compared to what most guys get. I wish I could afford to buy her out but it won't be happening on my wage with the house valued at so much.

[tugger]

There have been a few first owners grants introduced in qld over diferent governments and i think to say the latest grant was to contribute solely for the rise in realestate prices would be very debatable as i imagine it would have had many factors.

Sad to hear of your families job loses it seems this goverment is weilding the axe heavily in their first term early so people forget around the next election time its a shame its going to hurt so many people. I hope they are all looked after with good redundences pakages and can have some qaulity of life as i think there will be many older people in this strugle to find work that is the reality and human face of it all after the numbers crunchers have been satisfied

[billythakid]

we just bought our house 6 weeks ago , we got the $7000 and it was used for the legals etc , we got around 4 back into our bank . We didn't need to have it to buy our house as we had a decent deposit .

We also bought within our budget so my wage can cover everything ( my job is very secure)incase the missus loses her job .

the above means we bought what we could afford as our first house , not our dream house ,

It needs some work but nothing a coat of paint and elbow grease won't fix it up .

We couldv'e borrowed anothe 70 - 100 thou but didn't want to push our wages to the limit on repayments

I can't see what dropping the $7000 but keeping a $15000 new house grant will do as most peopl can only afford an older house as their first home .

[dassa]

I'm not going to get involved in the politics right at the moment but I believe making it only for new homes is what we need to get the economy going we need to stimulate the building industry.For anybody that works in any of the related industies we know how quiet things are by that I mean sparkies,plumbers and the like and as for that the building industry does have a follow on effect into the economy.

[billythakid]

I'm not going to get involved in the politics right at the moment but I believe making it only for new homes is what we need to get the economy going we need to stimulate the building industry.For anybody that works in any of the related industies we know how quiet things are by that I mean sparkies,plumbers and the like and as for that the building industry does have a follow on effect into the economy.

. Same thing has happened overseas , building boosted for a bit but then the estates are empty from people going into bankruptcy and banks can't sell the home unless it is at a loss . The estates Down near the servo south of the hyper dome are a prime example , they were all snapped up with the $21000 FHOG and now people can't afford the repayments . There was almost half the estate wanting to sell but couldn't due to not being able to sell to clear the mortgage .

[dassa]

I'm not going to get involved in the politics right at the moment but I believe making it only for new homes is what we need to get the economy going we need to stimulate the building industry.For anybody that works in any of the related industies we know how quiet things are by that I mean sparkies,plumbers and the like and as for that the building industry does have a follow on effect into the economy.

. Same thing has happened overseas , building boosted for a bit but then the estates are empty from people going into bankruptcy and banks can't sell the home unless it is at a loss . The estates Down near the servo south of the hyper dome are a prime example , they were all snapped up with the $21000 FHOG and now people can't afford the repayments . There was almost half the estate wanting to sell but couldn't due to not being able to sell to clear the mortgage .

Now would that have more to do with location rather then people not being able to afford the house and land,I know that area well and I wouldn't live there.As far as what has happened oversaes the banks were handing money hand over fist and giving people 110% of the home value to people who had no hope of every being able to pay that money's back unemployed and very low income.

Just anew kettle of fish now that BHP have just sacked 300 workers and closed a mine in queensland how does that effect the fedrral goverment bottom lines.

[The Mad Hughesy]

Well I for 1 like seeing the current Government doing whats right for QLD and not whats popular.

Sacking nurses, paramedics...

The masses are the first to whinge when they don't like the amount of care they recieve in a hospital, yet are all clapping and patting Newman on the back for sacking them. I really can't understand why

[The Mad Hughesy]

Not having a go at you or anything. I really don't care about what people's opinion of him are. Just hate the fact that they will praise his work, then complain about what he did 6 months later. And again I'm not saying this is you shortie, just saying in general.

[Cheyne_jones]

Lets not forget that what he is doing is simply a reaction to solve the legacy we have all been left with courtesy of the Labour Government. What ever the actual figures are, we are in massive debt we cant afford to service properly going forward hence something needs to happen.

I would much prefer the call be made now and a few go through the pain of losing their jobs (which I have a great amount of sympathy for, it sux big time), than the state wind up like Europe in a few years.

I will say though that since the Libs have got in I have noticed a good increase in sales through my small business and get the same information from all of my customers, I wont attribute this to them, but it all helps and maybe in a few months we can put on someone who is looking for work. If this happens in certain corners of the economy then all will work out in the long run.