Leaderboard

I think that is the Chinese way. The best way to humiliate Trump is to ignore him as best you can. Xi is a statesman, Trump is a buffoon.

Nice pics, Octave. Looks like the view from my bedroom window

Nomadpete, I'm a boomer and I set about making money from property and other investments during the period 1965 to 1995. I spent 30 years busting my gut, and along with other family members, ended up with several properties, including a 2000 ac farm. I estimate I had about $350,000 in accumulated assets by 1995, with at least a third of that being property. Then our bank foreclosed on us with no reason (no arrears, nothing), just saying they had "lost confidence" in our ability to service our loans. So they demanded repayment of $1M within 48 hrs, which forced us to sell everything we owned, at fire sale prices. No other bank would even look at our business, as they all ganged up on us, and said there must be something bad going on, that we weren't telling them. There wasn't, we had a good operational business with minimal problems. In the washup, a 5 acre block in Perth city got sold for $300K, the farm was sold for $550,000, a 1 acre industrial block with a huge shed in Kalgoorlie/Boulder sold for $50,000. In the years since, the 5 acre block in the city was subdivided by others, and it reaped multi-million dollar profits for them - despite capital gains tax. The farm is now worth $8M, and has been sold about 5 times since we sold it, and each time, the "baby boomers" who purchased it, made massive capital gains on their investment. The industrial property in Kalgoorlie is now worth several million - more baby boomers made huge capital gains from the ownership of that block of land. The above capital gains have been repeated ad-infinitum by baby boomers. One contributor here talks about he's just poured $500,000 into a subdivision, like he's done the nation a favour. He hasn't. He's made huge capital gains out of that subdivision, greatly enriching himself - and pushed property ownership out of the reach of young people. I feel that Chalmers hasn't gone far enough to tax wealthy baby boomers who have nearly all made vast profits out of property of all types - which property has gone ballistic in values in the last 25-30 years. I do feel for those baby boomers who never did manage to position themselves to make gains from property, because of their circumstances, or the inability to be shrewd with property purchases. I could never regain a fraction of my former wealth, as I had to start again at age 46, suffering from no assets at that age, and therefore no borrowing ability - as well as now carrying a life-long hatred of greedy, avaricious banks - who place unjust gains in shareholder wealth above all else. The baby boomers who are struggling with no property assets, have nothing to fear from Chalmers budget. The ones with banks shares can't lose, their financial gains have been huge, and will continue to be huge, because banks make monstrous profits - the Commonwealth made $2.7B in profit in the March quarter alone. There has not been a year for the last 30 years, where the Commonwealth Bank didn't make a monstrous profit - and this, despite also having to pay somewhere around $1B in fines, for devious and outright illegal corporate behaviour, over many years. There is a need for major wealth redistribution in Australia today, the wealth gap between the haves and have-nots, increases daily.

Xi gives Trump the cold shoulder. When Trump arrived in China, no high level Chinese dignatory was there to greet him. Think about that! Here's the "Leader of the Free World" arriving in a country, and he is not greeted by anyone of note. Compare that reception with that given to Obama 2015. I was looking for a video of Trump's arrival, but those I saw failed to point out the snub.

But you're still a millionaire, Peter - because of the massive increase in your house value. Asset-rich, but cash poor, that's for sure. There are thousands of baby-boomers just like you, and they are trapped to a certain degree, by the distortion in property prices. But at the end of the day, you can always cash in on that major value in your house, and purchase something smaller and newer and easier to maintain, such as an apartment. A sizeable number of my baby boomer friends have "downsized", and ended up with a major amount of cash to invest, thus allowing them to improve their lifestyle. You seem to have a lack of understanding as regards legalities and taxes around deaths. "Probate" is the act of determining the validity of a will, and the Court examines the will, determines if it's valid and then issues a "Grant of Probate", which allows the executor of the estate to proceed with asset distribution and finalisation of the Estate. If the family home os passed onto children, it can be sold within 2 years without payment of capital gains tax. If a superannuation death benefit is paid out, it can sometimes be taxed, depending on the circumstances of the beneficiary. As you have no super, there's no super tax to worry about. As to the shares, there's no tax payable upon inheriting them, only CGT when they are sold. There are no death duties in Australia, and there haven't been for many years. I feel our Govt should probably start looking at death duties, just as Britain had to reintroduce them, due to massive untaxed wealth gains.

The only property I have is the house I live in, fully paid off, no mortgage. My car is a 22yo Holden Astra I paid $6,000 18 months ago. I have no super, just enough in the bank to pay my bills and be cremated. When I pay off the $45 outstanding on my credit card next pension day, I will owe nothing. The shares in my name belong to the kids, due to my wife not updating her will. They were left in my name, but she said they were to go to the kids and I will honour that. They decide what happens to the dividends. I've said it before, when I go I want it to be with the very minimum of assets to minimise or eliminate probate.

When your garden's Cactus it will be OK. Nev

If it rained from "Now till Xmas", you would have a few problems. Nev

Sorry, but most of me disagrees with that assertion. Maybe just I don't mix with the 'right' boomers.

But if you bought them at $20 in 1998, you'd still be pretty happy - especially when you count the massive dividends paid out on them annually, along with the stock splits. One of SWMBO's Uncles was a CTB manager, and he was made redundant around 1997 when the Commonwealth was taken over by the Big Banks. He got a $250,000 redundancy payout, plus 50,000 Commonwealth shares as part of the deal. He's never sold any of them, AFAIK. Imagine what he's sitting on now. I bought 100 local Bendigo Bank shares in 2000 - $100 worth, because that's all I could afford at the time, because I was as broke as they make them. I was a founding customer of that branch at that time. Other well-heeled people bought up to several hundred thousand of those Bendigo Bank shares at $1 each. The shares paid 10% dividend for years, then they started paying 15% dividend, and the last few annual dividends were at 20%. But I know those profits have been at the expense of working people. I only wish I'd had $100,000 at that time, I'd be one of the baby boomers Chalmers is targeting - and I'd be squealing like a stuck pig, too - as they all are. I have no problem with Chalmers grabbing some money off the wealthy baby boomers, most of whom have made incredible capital gains over the last 30 or so years. Most are multi-millionaires.

I won't believed that it has rained until I see it in the rain guage. Also the BOM's definitin of rain is any drops falling from the sky. My definition is the creek rising.

Another Positive to celebrate. It looks as if the Trump Tower at Surfers is not a Goer. Nev

In the 2026 Budget, Govt services to veterans have been reduced by "better targeting" of monetary allocations. There's a lot of double-speak in this area, with DVA saying it has more money to pay to allied health providers. Then there's "an Annual Monetary Limit for veterans' allied health services", which appears to me, to be public service gobbledegook. It doesn't say, if that means individual Veterans face an annual limit on their health expenditure, or if the annual limit is the total paid to individual service providers. This needs clarification. Then there's the complication that Veterans are currently paid benefits under 3 Veterans Acts. I'm covered under the 1986 Veterans Entitlements Act, which covers all veterans up until 2004, when it was replaced by the Military Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 2004 (MRCA). There's also a third Act, the Safety Rehabilitation and Compensation (Defence-related Claims) Act 1988 (DRCA). All three Acts are being replaced from 1st July 2026, by a new "Vets Act", which will cover all Veterans. Entitlements under previous Acts will remain unchanged. The bottom line is, the number of Veterans is dropping rapidly, and they will soon only make up a small number to be serviced by DVA. As a result, the money allocated to Veterans should decrease accordingly. There are barely a handful of WW2 Veterans left, there are only a small number of Korean War Veterans, and even the Vietnam Veterans numbers are depleting rapidly. Post-Vietnam War Veterans are only a relatively small number as well, because the size of the Australian Military has been much smaller in the decades since the Vietnam War. The 2026 Budget for Veterans: QUOTE: "Based on the 2026 Federal Budget, the Australian government is restructuring veteran services, resulting in a reported reduction in expenditure to providers of approximately $779.5 million over five years. While the government describes these changes as "better targeting" of services to veterans and their families, critics describe this as a reduction in support, with some labelling it a "bandaid" solution. Key Changes and "Better Targeting" Measures: The government expects to achieve savings of $779.5 million over five years from 2025–26, with an ongoing savings of $352.4 million per year. Reduction in Payments: Specifically, "better targeting" of services is expected to decrease government payments to providers by $606.6 million over five years. Allied Health Limits: A significant portion of this involves introducing an Annual Monetary Limit for veterans' allied health services, amounting to $748 million in savings over three years starting in 2027–28. Simplifying Referral Requirements: Further savings of $30.1 million over three years will be achieved by simplifying referral requirements. Context of Reforms (VETS Act): These changes are part of the broader Veterans' Entitlements, Treatment and Support (Simplification and Harmonisation) Act 2025 (VETS Act), which takes full effect on 1 July 2026. Single System: The current complex three-Act system will be replaced by a single, updated Act (based on the MRCA) for all new claims. 'Grandparenting': The government has provided assurances that those already receiving benefits before 1 July 2026 will not have their payments reduced or altered, and will continue to receive annual indexation. Goal: The stated goal of these reforms, based on the Royal Commission recommendations, is to reduce complexity and speed up claims, which has been a major source of distress for veterans. Impact on Services: Advocacy Funding: While payments to providers are reduced, the government has reported increased funding for the Building Excellence in Support and Training (BEST) program to support free, volunteer advocate services. Allied Health Fees: In a contradictory move, the Department of Veterans' Affairs (DVA) noted that it is increasing allied health provider fees to improve veteran access to services, which was a recommendation of the Royal Commission. Grants: There will be a reduction in uncommitted grant funding for certain commemorative, memorial, and graves-related projects.The reforms aim to align veterans' support with modern workers' compensation schemes, placing a stronger emphasis on rehabilitation and early intervention."

Trump stepped off the plane followed by billionaires plus Eric and Lara. Imagine how outraged Trump would have been if Biden had got off the plane followed Hunter and his laptop. Now, it seems almost normal. Also, the Justice Department is trying to find a way to settle the $10 billion lawsuit Trump raised against the IRS for not doing enough to stop his tax returns from being made public. They want to settle before they have to go back to the judge to explain why it shouldn't get thrown out of court. The corruption continues.

You know it's dry when the weeds are dying. I know that Rain, Rain, go away is Top of the Pops down south, but I won't be singing it.

OME, It's time you scraped the cobwebs out of the rain gauge. Otherwise those rare drips won't make it to the bottom.