When my kids were younger I purchased an immense whiteboard and hung it from hooks in the ceiling timbers… hard to describe it, as our main room is a great pyramid… with a mezzanine floor.

First son was right into brainstorming… and we spent hours each week thrashing out ideas. Second son took a look (of utter derision) and avoided the exercise like the plague!

I’m convinced it IS possible to find an FA who IS dinkum, Ned.
We’re at the stage where it’s _critical_ we do so. A misstep at this stage might mean the loss of many tens (if not hundreds) of thousands of dollars.

I completely agree with your assessment: “There’s way easier ‘marks’ out there than you pair!!!” What we outlined meant some hard work at fair rates, with requirements this FA just couldn’t deliver in writing. We continually find that these guys know far less than the missus. Scary!~

“we’d pay him an hourly rate” -- You are purchasing a one off service from him Biker; Not asking him to manage the assets and be available 24/7 for advice on same ’til death do you part. (I’m not going to go near ANY of them if I reckon I can possibly avoid it!)

Would love to see your responses -- Thanks.

Think I’ve got to turn one of my spare bedrooms into a retirement planning office replete with a big whiteboard on one wall to list pertinent known facts and figures and to show a timeline re what needs to happen when!

Our list of Key Questions continues to grow, Ned. We’ve recently been harassed by an FA who figured he might steer us towards over-leveraged east coast properties. Faced with The List, yesterday, he backed off… and advised that he couldn’t meet our needs. (I used your parents’ retirement as one example, BTW.)

One of our ‘needs’ was to obtain, in writing, clear responses to the questions we raised. His other objection might have been that we’d pay him an hourly rate, rather than set him up with lucrative fees and commissions… and trailing commissions for decades to come.

Once we _do_ find someone who is prepared to provide written responses, we’ll forward them to you, Ned. Your situation appears to align with ours in many respects.

We’re allowed to earn $48K from any source (say rents), without tax, after retirement, Ned. My understanding is that, on top of that amount, all income we derive from Super is tax-free. One of the greatest problems we’re experiencing currently, is getting value-free, unbiased information from sources committed to promoting their own agenda (ie own kickback$$).

“So now we just watch other overseas pension funds or semi-government bodies come in any buy up our mining assets.”

The classic would have to be the Canuck pension fund buying up east coast toll roads, Greg.

I see JG is planning to give 15 councils $15 mil each to build low-coast housing in regional centres. This is supposed to cover 1000 homes in each centre. If you do the sums, you’ll see this _must_ align with your prophecy on future directions, Ned. At $150K per home we must be talking apartments / units; probably medium-high-rise. To what extent might this mean that councils may relax building laws, to meet tender requirements?

But instead the nation has borrowed and blown millions on school sheds, home insulation and a range of other projects that will do nothing to increase productivity and provide any reasonable economic return.

So now we just watch other overseas pension funds or semi-government bodies come in any buy up our mining assets.

We ain’t the greatest long term thinkers in Oz I am afraid to say.

‘Cause ma ‘n pa each having $16K pa coming in from investments in their names and/or discretionary trusts, plus another $9K pa each tax free from super doesn’t sounds too bad at all if that’s the case. As I can imagine a debt free couple with only modestly hungry needs getting by OK on $50K pa tax free in their dotage.

Especially if that $50K doesn’t touch the assets. I’m looking at re-juggling my retirement sums (and strategy) again!

You’re having a quiet one today I gather Biker? ”

Well, we were pretty knocked around when the laptop went down, Ned. Fortunately we had printed off all our flight details, hotel bookings, etc…

Just to keep you up to date:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/money/sour-outlook-for-house-prices-as-investors-are-the-only-source-of-growth-in-market/story-e6freqoo-1225890967795

Of course it seems that India is sniffing after QLD coal now:

http://www.couriermail.com.au/business/india-interested-in-queensland-coal/story-e6freqmx-1225890924715

- Inflation

- Interest rate rises

- Rent rises

Suspect that probably even covers the stagflation scenario Biker.

Stagdeflation is a different storey as we both know from our family anecdotes. It’s the wild card in the deck I guess. Not all that sure it’s worth getting too excited about it though. Cash is king in such circumstances -- Except it earns no income. But then neither do most investments most likely!

Apart from having a very secure job, there aren’t a lot of ways to prepare I suspect. And while it might sound like a cop out, I suspect the regulatory changes that would occur would be so great as to make a lot of prior preparation seem a bit ridiculous in hindsight. Super would be open slather for both ‘young and old’ for starters I’d imagine -- Just as one example.

Either way, I visualise the following:

- Wage rises

- Inflation

- Interest rate rises

- Rent rises

- More winters travelling(!)

Note that I didn’t include capital appreciation of property.
I see it as gradual… inevitable…. part of the whole inflationery trend…. .

I certainly believe WA will be:

http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/wa-growth-burst-tipped-by-chamber-20100712-1070y.html

In any case I find it a bit rich that anyone in Australia would take credit for avoiding a major recession when we know our commodities exports played such a major role in supporting the economy.

So what have the Treasury done? Well they advised the Government to borrow and spend, but let’s just wait and see what value we get for all these billions in the years ahead before we call the Governments stimulus plan a success.

It is now even more complicated yet collects less tax.

What is the point in that?

http://www.watoday.com.au/business/a-victory-of-sorts-20100709-1048u.html

But this is what governments have encouraged of late -- special pleading from vested interests. And it’s worked. The new play book has been written -- if you’re big enough, come to the government on bended knee and we’ll carve out a special position for you. Scream loud enough and the government will put its tail between its legs and crawl up in a ball in defeat.

For example according to the article:

BHP Billiton will pay the new tax on the coal it produces on the eastern seaboard and iron ore in the Pilbara because that is fair and equitable to all Australians who ultimately own these resources (the government’s thinking) but not on what it rips out of the ground at Olympic Dam in South Australia (the world’s largest uranium deposit, and another non-replaceable asset) or its Cannington mine in Queensland (the world’s largest silver producer)

I don’t think this is a simplification of the tax system or what Henry had in mind.

Just looks plain stupid to me.

I think it’s mainly a case of the miners coming to the conclusion that they’d ultimately lose any argument that they shouldn’t pay handsomely for the privelige of digging up non-renewable resources in a country that doesn’t have anything else to offer. And until Australia develops a world class nanotechnology industry (or something similar), we’ve got little choice but to try to profit from mining while we can. And that will probably be until the last bit of ore is dug up.

RSPT is out of the way. Next cab off the rank will probably be the ETS. Then Gillard will be off to the gov-general to call the election.

The problem is now is that the MRRT does not make any sense. What is the reason for this tax? What happened to the fundamental ideology behind the RSPT?

Also won’t the mining companies still get the 1% corporate tax cut? If so I wonder really how much overall this tax will contribute?

Finally what will happen if commodities prices fall or weaken? Are the miners outflanking the government because perhaps they see some price weakness in the future and reckon they won’t be paying much extra tax (if any) anyway?