Check in at 6am, in surgery at 7:30am, discharged about 1pm I think.

I never realised this was a thing, but good god that place must have witnessed some massacres (RIP their bathrooms).

I did a stint at KFC back in my uni days, and the amount of food some people could put away was insane. There was a guy that would come in on the same day every two weeks and polish off a mega feast on his own- that was something like 12pcs of chicken, 6? Strips, 12? Nuggets, 2x Large fries, Family coleslaw, family potato & gravy & 1.25L Pepsi.

I'd agree with this, the Project 25 concept is to create small government, meaning minimal regulation. Sentiment will be that with less regulation, and potentially new protectionist tariffs, US based businesses should prosper.

An obvious exception to this is anything related to green initiatives/energy or where a businesses market advantage is in complying/dealing with regulation, with reduced regulation their competitors will be carrying less burden.

1- forget anything the Amway bloke said to you. They were just trying to get you to help them on their journey to FI. Don't be that stepping stone. Flogging off Amway is not FI.

So back to your question- Can a 30 year old hit FI? -> Yes, technically it is possible. Is it achievable for most Australians before 30, absolutely not.

A common metric for FI is having savings/investments equal to 25x your yearly living expenses. So the question becomes how do you get there? Let's say you have 10 years to get there.

For simplicity sake we will make the assumption that your salary and expenses both increase at 3% (inflation), and investments return 5%. This also assumes 0 lifestyle creep.

To hit 25x your expenses in 10 years of working you will need to invest 2x your expenses each month after 9 years you will have 24.66 times your expenses invested, 10 years and it will be 28.5x.

So, regardless of what your income is, if you can keep your annual expenses to less than 1/3 of your after tax income and invest the rest in a way that you receive moderate after tax/inflation returns of 5% you can hit FI.

Now go and take a look at your income and expenses, your spend is probably closer to 80-90% of your income. This leaves you with a few actions needed to hit FI. Either increase your income, lower your expenses, or ideally a combination of both.

The numbers above will leave a very lean version of FI, with expenses matching a standard of living that will not elevate above that of a 20 year old.

From memory, most young Australians living separately (no house share, or living with parents) are spending in the vicinity of 40% (please fact check this) of their income on accommodation alone (rent/mortgage), which means for the average young Australian FI by 30 is an unachievable fantasy.

I thought that was their mission- fuck things up beyond repair and blame the NDP/Libs/Biden/Hillary for it.

What on earth did I just read? Rick keeps going on about Trudeau like you'd expect from a teenager fangirl hellbent on 'getting even' after being turned down by her years-long obsessive crush.

I wonder if Rick Bell has a secret shrine to Trudeau in the back of the closet hoping that one day maybe Justin might notice him.

If Rick ever reads this- people might take you seriously as a journalist if you put a bit of substance (accomplishments or failures might be a good start) into your pieces instead of just coming across as rant penned while in the middle of having stroke (up to you to decide what type of stroke).

Triggering a capital gain event in a low income year is a very common tax strategy.

Regarding the wash sale... I was of the understanding that a wash sale was specifically in reference to selling and rebuying at a loss to offset other income for tax minimisation purposes.

If you're worried about it being classified as a wash, would it be satisfactory to you and your wife to purchase a similar share instead of the same one. A call option could also work to lock in a price for the future.

To be clear I did not suggest it was generically older people, I was specific to people with high super balances in the pension phase.

You're probably in the minority as someone not owning outright to not have been impacted. The majority of Australians either own (outright), own (mortgage), rent, or a combination of the 3. Few adults are lucky enough to have a roof over their head without falling into one of these categories. The owners with a mortgage and renters have been negatively impacted by rate rises and flow on rent increases. This means those owners without a mortgage (already the group with the highest disposable income due to lack of accommodation costs) may actually have an increase in disposable income which is the opposite of the desired effect of increasing rates.

I noted that overseas borrowing brings in risk due to fluctuations in exchange rate, however, advantage is not automatically removed due to a low exchange rate. It's the change in interest rates that typically drives exchange rate adjustments, not the differential itself. If you borrow and repay at the same exchange rate you will get the advantage of a lower interest rate.

I agree that the government needs to start looking for more mechanisms to manage inflation, but I think increasing GST by 1% is too widespread non-targetted approach. There's enough data available to understand which segments are causing inflation and deploy targeted measures instead of wide spread ones. The problem is that this would require the government of the day wearing political backlash for these changes in these mechanisms, whereas interest rates have been seen to be independently managed so society has been trained to view this as a separate to the government.

The government really should create a monetary policy body that is able to advise on recommended action to the government, including rba. Interest rates are only so effective as the money market is so international these days, that changes to Australian rates only affects the entities borrowing domestically. Entities borrowing internationally can access money at lower rates (although this does subject them to exchange rate fluctuation).

I'm probably not knowledgeable enough, but I think part of what is propping up inflation can be attributed to large amounts of funds in superannuation accounts in the pension phase where earnings attract 0% tax. Meaning owners of these accounts, who are looking for a 'safe' investment, but are not susceptible to changes in cash rate, or changes in income tax rates. The Australian property market has historically been safe and also given great returns (almost as safe as cash, but much better returns) so this is where a large amount of investment can happen.

Tax wise it's a terrible idea. Capital gains would be payable on the % owned by the parent at the time it's sold. (Best case is it's only on the time between purchase and inheriting)

You're better off having the property entirely in your name if it's going to be a ppor. That way you'll receive the tax benefits of it being a ppor.

If you were to structure it as a loan to you, paying interest on it (instead of rent) that would work out in your favour, but the parent would not have any capital growth.

Also, make sure any agreement is well documented with clause detailing exit strategies.

Given $190k pa is more than 3x the median Australian income and has an effective tax rate of 27%. I'm going to say that doesn't seem terrible to me.

To paraphrase Joe Hockey if you work hard and get a good job you'll be able to afford the Porsche and the luxury car tax (or just buy one that's a couple years old).

I'd contest that it's easier to make a mistake that leads to consequences on a bike than a car. It's a lot easier to lose control of a bike (lock up/ slide out) while trying to avoid a collision than in a car, and in that situation you may become responsible for damage caused by your bike.

Sounds like you need to get some quotes for third party liability. I consider that to be the minimum insurance to have and would never be on the road without it. I don't want to lose my house if I hit a Ferrari, even if it's not my fault, chances are the Ferrari owner/insurance has better lawyers than me and they'll want their pound of flesh.

First figure out the dollar difference in premium between collision and third party liability. Multiply that by 5 years (i.e. savings over 5 years) and figure out if replacing your bike would cost more or less than that. If it would cost more, get the insurance.

If you're a newer rider you're more likely to drop it or be in an accident so I'd probably change that 5 years down to 2 or 3 years.

This is based off owning the bike outright, and having sufficient cash to replace it or fix it in the event of a collision/crash and separate personal injury cover in the event that you hurt yourself and cannot work.

Once they've sat down it takes energy to change/move and I guess the bigger the person the more energy it takes. I've never really thought about it too much (rarely catch public transport), but if I was planning to get off in a couple stops I don't think I'd bother moving (I'm not one of the large humans you are talking about though, so wouldn't be impacting on your space). If I was settling in for the next 30 mins I think it would be different and would move.

True- it seems I missed that bit.

At 15, one of the worst things you can do is lose sight of graduating high school with satisfactory grades. It's true that university isn't for everyone, and some vocational careers can pay well, but if you do want to further education later in life it'll be a hell of a lot easier if you complete HS.

Have you looked into the average age of successful body builders? I'm guessing they have spent a lot of money on training, coaching, nutrition, supplements, and even travel trying to get to the pro level. You're going to need a job that pays well enough to support you on the journey, while also allowing you enough free time to focus on your training.

You'll also need to set yourself up for a post body building career. Maybe focussing on options that are aligned with the health and fitness industry, nutrition, personal training, sport & exercise science etc. If you start on that journey, you should be well placed to support your training in the early days and if an opportunity to make a living out of body building arises, you should be able to switch over pretty easily.

Interestingly enough, it omitted anything to do with the flood recovery in 2013.

Best option would be to consider all assets (including house and business) shared and pool all income, with each partner getting a spending allowance from the pooled income.

If the partners wish to maintain financial independence from each other it could work to consider assets and income separately.

Asset 1- Builder business is fully partner 1's responsibility. Any monies paid out of the business is considered Partner 1's income for income pooling purposes. For purposes below consider their salary at $120k, and any additional top ups they give themselves will be considered dividend

Asset 2- Treat the house as an IP business owned fully by partner 2, get a separate account for it. The family is responsible for paying market rent and the house business receives rent and pays bills as though it were an investment property (rates, insurance, maintenance). Partner 2 can choose to pay themselves a dividend which would be included in their income for pooling purposes or keep profits in the 'business'. This would just be a budgeting process, not a tax paying entity.

Income At this point both partners will have a salary and a business that can retain profit or pay out dividends. Any additional 'dividend' paid out to either partner should be considered income. Both partners should contribute a fixed percentage of their income to the family account (e.g. 80%) and retain the balance (e.g. 20%) for personal spending.

Expenses The family account will then take care of joint costs, including paying market value rent to partner 2s business account, electricity, groceries, childcare, non business vehicles, holidays, etc. Personal spending is just that, things the adult each buy for themselves.

The split of domestic labour (child rearing, household chores etc) hasn't really been taken into account here. It could be agreed that the person doing the majority of the domestic labour pays a smaller percentage of their income into the family account.

For peace of mind you probably want to check that the gear you purchase has a EN 17092 rating of Class AAA, AA, or A rating, meaning it provides protection for both impact and abrasion.

Revit usually has decent quality gear, and not extravagant pricing. Rarely will you find good gear for cheap (maybe last season on clearance). Comfort is a major factor when I purchase protective gear, if it's uncomfortable I'm less likely to put it on no matter how good the deal it was.

Just because a pair of pants appear stylish, does not mean they're not going to provide good protection. If they're a bit tighter, and the padding is positioned correctly they'll probably hold the protection in place better than a looser style. Fit (including placement of padding) and certification are the most important. You'll also want to consider waterproof/breathability ratings to suit the type of riding you expect to do.

Nah not 50/50, but to accept that there are probably valid points included in both arguments that may be omitted by the other side. I believe it is up to me to furnish myself with as much information/fact and discard the opinion to develop an unbiased understanding. This sometimes involves reviewing information from sources that I may disagree with.

But the NSW government is going to build 30,000 new homes. Once the projects are complete in approx. 5 years they will accommodate close to 72,000 people (average of 2.4/per dwelling) of the 500,000 (national) net migration this year alone. I think the net migration over 5 years is forecast for approx 2.5million people nationally.

Oh and the trades needed build these projects definitely won't impact on the cost of new housing in the wider new build market. /s

*Just to clarify, my problem isn't the migration, it's the lack of strategy at federal, state and council levels to effectively accommodate and provide infrastructure for the increasing population.

Although usually not to the same % but you can leverage other investments.

It was 10 years between rupturing my ACL and surgery. I only ended up getting the surgery due to the instability in the knee causing meniscus root tear, meaning the meniscus could move around in my knee and either catch, or provide 0 cushioning between the bones. Essentially, not getting it fixed earlier complicated the injury, required surgery and recovery.

Good prehab to strengthen the muscles around the knee really helps the recovery.

Any pain you're experiencing right now is likely due to the bone bruising. It takes ages for bone bruising to fully heal, and if not fully healed before your surgery will make rehab really tough. You absolutely need to do the rehab mobility exercises early on (these prevent scar tissue building up, reduce inflammation/fluid build up and allow flexibility in the healing tissue. If you've still got bone bruising they might be painful.

No, but they can probably spend your money paying one of their mates to come up with a way to spend more of your money to develop a white paper on one, only to then hide the white paper behind the privilege of Cabinet so only they know what it actually said.