Moderator: 3ne2nr Mods
Red government hack? Yellow opposition victim? I wonder where the tuner intelligence elite will put him?Dizzy28 wrote:Lots of assumptions there but to me the kicker is -
"But tax like this is good news for our political system. When more people are directly paying taxes, it will make us even less forgiving of poor execution, infrastructure, or governance. This is a policy that will strengthen our longer-term institutions. Young people should celebrate that."
This assume our voting population is nuanced which they show time and time again they are not. Even here on these forums we see it in the political threads.
wing wrote:Red government hack? Yellow opposition victim? I wonder where the tuner intelligence elite will put him?Dizzy28 wrote:Lots of assumptions there but to me the kicker is -
"But tax like this is good news for our political system. When more people are directly paying taxes, it will make us even less forgiving of poor execution, infrastructure, or governance. This is a policy that will strengthen our longer-term institutions. Young people should celebrate that."
This assume our voting population is nuanced which they show time and time again they are not. Even here on these forums we see it in the political threads.
Written by a red government idiotDuane 3NE 2NR wrote:anyone feeling this?
Property tax: the economic booster Trinidad and Tobago needs
The government’s property tax could be the booster shot this economy needs.
I understand that sounds absurd. No one likes taxes. When you’re living in a country with widespread waste and graft, an instinctive willingness to raise the pitchforks against the taxman is even more understandable.
After all, surely higher taxes should discourage economic activity, not the other way around? And most times they do.
But this property tax is different.
The narrative so far, even from its supporters, is that the property tax is a necessary evil in order to buttress public finances during a downturn and pay for local services.
For its opponents, a tax is an affront, given the economic ravages of covid19.
What both sides are missing is that this could be a positive economic boost.
Context is necessary. A whole generation of investors has experienced 20 years of consistently rising property rises, artificially buoyed by oil and gas money. When growth tanked, along with the 2015 energy price crash, property prices held stable.
A large part of this is because there is very little cost to sitting on idle property. It is seen as an inflation hedge that is unlikely to decline very much in value.
The result – a significant over-investment in property. But that over-investment has not resulted in lower prices – because most owners just sit on their property, rather than sell or lower rents. The market therefore remains stagnant, and hundreds of millions if not billions are trapped in unproductive uses.
Just before 2015, a horde of businesspeople invested in gated-property developments in the $3-$4 million range. Many of these continue to sit idle – out of reach for young people. Most owners don’t even care if they don’t collect rent.
This has contributed to stagnation and decline in a developing economy that is in desperate need of productive, foreign-exchange-earning assets. Raising capital for a new business or an export-producing idea is that much harder when you’re competing against a property as an asset.
The property tax can change this. By imposing a cost on idle property owners will be incentivised to hustle either to sell or rent their property. In the first place, this will largely result in lower rents and prices for young people.
Crucially though, more people will start to look for alternative investments, such as private equity or local stocks or bonds. With mortgage-backed lending slightly less attractive, banks will equally be nudged towards lending to non-property investments, helping to unlock some of the $8 billion they had in excess cash reserves as of June 2021. The result could be an increase in economic activity.
By jolting investors and banks out of their risk-averse stupor, it can move the frontier of what people may consider investing in. Suddenly your niece’s environmentally-friendly packaging company or your nephew’s friend’s tech start-up looks more interesting.
Our mutual funds, brokerages, publicly traded companies, and others should take this as a new opportunity to roll out new investment options, and to deploy capital in more interesting forms of private equity.
Businesses need to get ready to be investible. Risk aversion isn’t entirely to blame. Deal-flow is just as much of a problem. Too many entrepreneurs still fail to demonstrate the potential of well-defined addressable markets, or even to present decent projections.
It is not just start-ups. Managers and owners should dust off their capital expansion plans. We should have thousands of investor-friendly businesses with pitch decks at the ready, preparing to scale.
Our economic system, from our overvalued currency to our antiquated labour laws to our forests of red tape, is designed to keep us from taking risks. Hemingway wrote that one goes bankrupt: “gradually, and then suddenly”. Risk aversion is the luxury of the financially secure – which TT is not.
Too often we attack our political system for rewarding populism. This tax is hardly that. It is in fact almost universally unpopular – which is why it has been treated as a hot potato, tossed from one party to the other.
But tax like this is good news for our political system. When more people are directly paying taxes, it will make us even less forgiving of poor execution, infrastructure, or governance. This is a policy that will strengthen our longer-term institutions. Young people should celebrate that.
We need to start taking more measured, calculated business risks that play to our strengths in strong export industries. The property tax can be the nudge we need to get moving.
Kiran Mathur Mohammed is an economist and co-founder of medl, an IDB Lab and Microsoft-backed social impact health tech company. Send feedback to kmmpub@gmail.com.
https://newsday.co.tt/2021/09/23/proper ... bago-needs
The alpha has spoken.....awaits acolytes, stragglers and rival wannabe alphas.zoom rader wrote:Written by a red government idiotDuane 3NE 2NR wrote:anyone feeling this?
Property tax: the economic booster Trinidad and Tobago needs
The government’s property tax could be the booster shot this economy needs.
I understand that sounds absurd. No one likes taxes. When you’re living in a country with widespread waste and graft, an instinctive willingness to raise the pitchforks against the taxman is even more understandable.
After all, surely higher taxes should discourage economic activity, not the other way around? And most times they do.
But this property tax is different.
The narrative so far, even from its supporters, is that the property tax is a necessary evil in order to buttress public finances during a downturn and pay for local services.
For its opponents, a tax is an affront, given the economic ravages of covid19.
What both sides are missing is that this could be a positive economic boost.
Context is necessary. A whole generation of investors has experienced 20 years of consistently rising property rises, artificially buoyed by oil and gas money. When growth tanked, along with the 2015 energy price crash, property prices held stable.
A large part of this is because there is very little cost to sitting on idle property. It is seen as an inflation hedge that is unlikely to decline very much in value.
The result – a significant over-investment in property. But that over-investment has not resulted in lower prices – because most owners just sit on their property, rather than sell or lower rents. The market therefore remains stagnant, and hundreds of millions if not billions are trapped in unproductive uses.
Just before 2015, a horde of businesspeople invested in gated-property developments in the $3-$4 million range. Many of these continue to sit idle – out of reach for young people. Most owners don’t even care if they don’t collect rent.
This has contributed to stagnation and decline in a developing economy that is in desperate need of productive, foreign-exchange-earning assets. Raising capital for a new business or an export-producing idea is that much harder when you’re competing against a property as an asset.
The property tax can change this. By imposing a cost on idle property owners will be incentivised to hustle either to sell or rent their property. In the first place, this will largely result in lower rents and prices for young people.
Crucially though, more people will start to look for alternative investments, such as private equity or local stocks or bonds. With mortgage-backed lending slightly less attractive, banks will equally be nudged towards lending to non-property investments, helping to unlock some of the $8 billion they had in excess cash reserves as of June 2021. The result could be an increase in economic activity.
By jolting investors and banks out of their risk-averse stupor, it can move the frontier of what people may consider investing in. Suddenly your niece’s environmentally-friendly packaging company or your nephew’s friend’s tech start-up looks more interesting.
Our mutual funds, brokerages, publicly traded companies, and others should take this as a new opportunity to roll out new investment options, and to deploy capital in more interesting forms of private equity.
Businesses need to get ready to be investible. Risk aversion isn’t entirely to blame. Deal-flow is just as much of a problem. Too many entrepreneurs still fail to demonstrate the potential of well-defined addressable markets, or even to present decent projections.
It is not just start-ups. Managers and owners should dust off their capital expansion plans. We should have thousands of investor-friendly businesses with pitch decks at the ready, preparing to scale.
Our economic system, from our overvalued currency to our antiquated labour laws to our forests of red tape, is designed to keep us from taking risks. Hemingway wrote that one goes bankrupt: “gradually, and then suddenly”. Risk aversion is the luxury of the financially secure – which TT is not.
Too often we attack our political system for rewarding populism. This tax is hardly that. It is in fact almost universally unpopular – which is why it has been treated as a hot potato, tossed from one party to the other.
But tax like this is good news for our political system. When more people are directly paying taxes, it will make us even less forgiving of poor execution, infrastructure, or governance. This is a policy that will strengthen our longer-term institutions. Young people should celebrate that.
We need to start taking more measured, calculated business risks that play to our strengths in strong export industries. The property tax can be the nudge we need to get moving.
Kiran Mathur Mohammed is an economist and co-founder of medl, an IDB Lab and Microsoft-backed social impact health tech company. Send feedback to kmmpub@gmail.com.
https://newsday.co.tt/2021/09/23/proper ... bago-needs
Kiran Mathur Mohammed
teems1 wrote:Nobody has problems paying a tax if and only if they see value for their money.
Right now they collect more than enough. If they trim the fat, end corruption, nepotism, kickbacks etc. They'll have more than enough to run the country.
Fix your leaking bucket before asking for more water.
VexXx Dogg wrote:teems1 wrote:Nobody has problems paying a tax if and only if they see value for their money.
Right now they collect more than enough. If they trim the fat, end corruption, nepotism, kickbacks etc. They'll have more than enough to run the country.
Fix your leaking bucket before asking for more water.
I like this analogy.
teems1 wrote:Nobody has problems paying a tax if and only if they see value for their money.
Right now they collect more than enough. If they trim the fat, end corruption, nepotism, kickbacks etc. They'll have more than enough to run the country.
Fix your leaking bucket before asking for more water.
Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:anyone feeling this?
Property tax: the economic booster Trinidad and Tobago needs
The government’s property tax could be the booster shot this economy needs.
I understand that sounds absurd. No one likes taxes. When you’re living in a country with widespread waste and graft, an instinctive willingness to raise the pitchforks against the taxman is even more understandable.
After all, surely higher taxes should discourage economic activity, not the other way around? And most times they do.
But this property tax is different.
The narrative so far, even from its supporters, is that the property tax is a necessary evil in order to buttress public finances during a downturn and pay for local services.
For its opponents, a tax is an affront, given the economic ravages of covid19.
What both sides are missing is that this could be a positive economic boost.
Context is necessary. A whole generation of investors has experienced 20 years of consistently rising property rises, artificially buoyed by oil and gas money. When growth tanked, along with the 2015 energy price crash, property prices held stable.
A large part of this is because there is very little cost to sitting on idle property. It is seen as an inflation hedge that is unlikely to decline very much in value.
The result – a significant over-investment in property. But that over-investment has not resulted in lower prices – because most owners just sit on their property, rather than sell or lower rents. The market therefore remains stagnant, and hundreds of millions if not billions are trapped in unproductive uses.
Just before 2015, a horde of businesspeople invested in gated-property developments in the $3-$4 million range. Many of these continue to sit idle – out of reach for young people. Most owners don’t even care if they don’t collect rent.
This has contributed to stagnation and decline in a developing economy that is in desperate need of productive, foreign-exchange-earning assets. Raising capital for a new business or an export-producing idea is that much harder when you’re competing against a property as an asset.
The property tax can change this. By imposing a cost on idle property owners will be incentivised to hustle either to sell or rent their property. In the first place, this will largely result in lower rents and prices for young people.
Crucially though, more people will start to look for alternative investments, such as private equity or local stocks or bonds. With mortgage-backed lending slightly less attractive, banks will equally be nudged towards lending to non-property investments, helping to unlock some of the $8 billion they had in excess cash reserves as of June 2021. The result could be an increase in economic activity.
By jolting investors and banks out of their risk-averse stupor, it can move the frontier of what people may consider investing in. Suddenly your niece’s environmentally-friendly packaging company or your nephew’s friend’s tech start-up looks more interesting.
Our mutual funds, brokerages, publicly traded companies, and others should take this as a new opportunity to roll out new investment options, and to deploy capital in more interesting forms of private equity.
Businesses need to get ready to be investible. Risk aversion isn’t entirely to blame. Deal-flow is just as much of a problem. Too many entrepreneurs still fail to demonstrate the potential of well-defined addressable markets, or even to present decent projections.
It is not just start-ups. Managers and owners should dust off their capital expansion plans. We should have thousands of investor-friendly businesses with pitch decks at the ready, preparing to scale.
Our economic system, from our overvalued currency to our antiquated labour laws to our forests of red tape, is designed to keep us from taking risks. Hemingway wrote that one goes bankrupt: “gradually, and then suddenly”. Risk aversion is the luxury of the financially secure – which TT is not.
Too often we attack our political system for rewarding populism. This tax is hardly that. It is in fact almost universally unpopular – which is why it has been treated as a hot potato, tossed from one party to the other.
But tax like this is good news for our political system. When more people are directly paying taxes, it will make us even less forgiving of poor execution, infrastructure, or governance. This is a policy that will strengthen our longer-term institutions. Young people should celebrate that.
We need to start taking more measured, calculated business risks that play to our strengths in strong export industries. The property tax can be the nudge we need to get moving.
Kiran Mathur Mohammed is an economist and co-founder of medl, an IDB Lab and Microsoft-backed social impact health tech company. Send feedback to kmmpub@gmail.com.
https://newsday.co.tt/2021/09/23/proper ... bago-needs
88sins wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:anyone feeling this?
Property tax: the economic booster Trinidad and Tobago needs
The government’s property tax could be the booster shot this economy needs.
I understand that sounds absurd. No one likes taxes. When you’re living in a country with widespread waste and graft, an instinctive willingness to raise the pitchforks against the taxman is even more understandable.
After all, surely higher taxes should discourage economic activity, not the other way around? And most times they do.
But this property tax is different.
The narrative so far, even from its supporters, is that the property tax is a necessary evil in order to buttress public finances during a downturn and pay for local services.
For its opponents, a tax is an affront, given the economic ravages of covid19.
What both sides are missing is that this could be a positive economic boost.
Context is necessary. A whole generation of investors has experienced 20 years of consistently rising property rises, artificially buoyed by oil and gas money. When growth tanked, along with the 2015 energy price crash, property prices held stable.
A large part of this is because there is very little cost to sitting on idle property. It is seen as an inflation hedge that is unlikely to decline very much in value.
The result – a significant over-investment in property. But that over-investment has not resulted in lower prices – because most owners just sit on their property, rather than sell or lower rents. The market therefore remains stagnant, and hundreds of millions if not billions are trapped in unproductive uses.
Just before 2015, a horde of businesspeople invested in gated-property developments in the $3-$4 million range. Many of these continue to sit idle – out of reach for young people. Most owners don’t even care if they don’t collect rent.
This has contributed to stagnation and decline in a developing economy that is in desperate need of productive, foreign-exchange-earning assets. Raising capital for a new business or an export-producing idea is that much harder when you’re competing against a property as an asset.
The property tax can change this. By imposing a cost on idle property owners will be incentivised to hustle either to sell or rent their property. In the first place, this will largely result in lower rents and prices for young people.
Crucially though, more people will start to look for alternative investments, such as private equity or local stocks or bonds. With mortgage-backed lending slightly less attractive, banks will equally be nudged towards lending to non-property investments, helping to unlock some of the $8 billion they had in excess cash reserves as of June 2021. The result could be an increase in economic activity.
By jolting investors and banks out of their risk-averse stupor, it can move the frontier of what people may consider investing in. Suddenly your niece’s environmentally-friendly packaging company or your nephew’s friend’s tech start-up looks more interesting.
Our mutual funds, brokerages, publicly traded companies, and others should take this as a new opportunity to roll out new investment options, and to deploy capital in more interesting forms of private equity.
Businesses need to get ready to be investible. Risk aversion isn’t entirely to blame. Deal-flow is just as much of a problem. Too many entrepreneurs still fail to demonstrate the potential of well-defined addressable markets, or even to present decent projections.
It is not just start-ups. Managers and owners should dust off their capital expansion plans. We should have thousands of investor-friendly businesses with pitch decks at the ready, preparing to scale.
Our economic system, from our overvalued currency to our antiquated labour laws to our forests of red tape, is designed to keep us from taking risks. Hemingway wrote that one goes bankrupt: “gradually, and then suddenly”. Risk aversion is the luxury of the financially secure – which TT is not.
Too often we attack our political system for rewarding populism. This tax is hardly that. It is in fact almost universally unpopular – which is why it has been treated as a hot potato, tossed from one party to the other.
But tax like this is good news for our political system. When more people are directly paying taxes, it will make us even less forgiving of poor execution, infrastructure, or governance. This is a policy that will strengthen our longer-term institutions. Young people should celebrate that.
We need to start taking more measured, calculated business risks that play to our strengths in strong export industries. The property tax can be the nudge we need to get moving.
Kiran Mathur Mohammed is an economist and co-founder of medl, an IDB Lab and Microsoft-backed social impact health tech company. Send feedback to kmmpub@gmail.com.
https://newsday.co.tt/2021/09/23/proper ... bago-needs
This has to be the most jackass utterance ever made in the entire history of the English language.
So, say I pay 4M for a property, and renting it out for 6K/m, but can't find tenants to occupy it, but I cool with it remaining unoccupied.
But because of increased property taxes, I will lower my rent rate to allow a younger probably more irresponsible person that may eventually not be able to pay my reduced rent in a timely and consistent manner long term, just so I can get some money to pay the increased property tax? Or I go sell it for a loss just to get away from having to pay the property tax? And that is how they plan to stimulate economic growth and movement?
Anyway, in case allyuh didn't know
Politicians and their minions live by a motto, "if yuh can't blind them with brilliance, baffle them with bull$#!t".
Please note, politicians aren't known for their brilliance.
Redman wrote:So yuh saying the crappy AG is able to outmaneuver the silk empowered UNC, to the point where he can slip clauses that require constitutional majority in to the bill after the simple majority vote.?
And it's only tuner that pick up on it.
Not the legal luminance that is the UNC
Not the independent bench
Not the Law Association.
Just tuner.
Sounds legit.
L
O
L
88sins wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:anyone feeling this?
Property tax: the economic booster Trinidad and Tobago needs
The government’s property tax could be the booster shot this economy needs.
I understand that sounds absurd. No one likes taxes. When you’re living in a country with widespread waste and graft, an instinctive willingness to raise the pitchforks against the taxman is even more understandable.
After all, surely higher taxes should discourage economic activity, not the other way around? And most times they do.
But this property tax is different.
The narrative so far, even from its supporters, is that the property tax is a necessary evil in order to buttress public finances during a downturn and pay for local services.
For its opponents, a tax is an affront, given the economic ravages of covid19.
What both sides are missing is that this could be a positive economic boost.
Context is necessary. A whole generation of investors has experienced 20 years of consistently rising property rises, artificially buoyed by oil and gas money. When growth tanked, along with the 2015 energy price crash, property prices held stable.
A large part of this is because there is very little cost to sitting on idle property. It is seen as an inflation hedge that is unlikely to decline very much in value.
The result – a significant over-investment in property. But that over-investment has not resulted in lower prices – because most owners just sit on their property, rather than sell or lower rents. The market therefore remains stagnant, and hundreds of millions if not billions are trapped in unproductive uses.
Just before 2015, a horde of businesspeople invested in gated-property developments in the $3-$4 million range. Many of these continue to sit idle – out of reach for young people. Most owners don’t even care if they don’t collect rent.
This has contributed to stagnation and decline in a developing economy that is in desperate need of productive, foreign-exchange-earning assets. Raising capital for a new business or an export-producing idea is that much harder when you’re competing against a property as an asset.
The property tax can change this. By imposing a cost on idle property owners will be incentivised to hustle either to sell or rent their property. In the first place, this will largely result in lower rents and prices for young people.
Crucially though, more people will start to look for alternative investments, such as private equity or local stocks or bonds. With mortgage-backed lending slightly less attractive, banks will equally be nudged towards lending to non-property investments, helping to unlock some of the $8 billion they had in excess cash reserves as of June 2021. The result could be an increase in economic activity.
By jolting investors and banks out of their risk-averse stupor, it can move the frontier of what people may consider investing in. Suddenly your niece’s environmentally-friendly packaging company or your nephew’s friend’s tech start-up looks more interesting.
Our mutual funds, brokerages, publicly traded companies, and others should take this as a new opportunity to roll out new investment options, and to deploy capital in more interesting forms of private equity.
Businesses need to get ready to be investible. Risk aversion isn’t entirely to blame. Deal-flow is just as much of a problem. Too many entrepreneurs still fail to demonstrate the potential of well-defined addressable markets, or even to present decent projections.
It is not just start-ups. Managers and owners should dust off their capital expansion plans. We should have thousands of investor-friendly businesses with pitch decks at the ready, preparing to scale.
Our economic system, from our overvalued currency to our antiquated labour laws to our forests of red tape, is designed to keep us from taking risks. Hemingway wrote that one goes bankrupt: “gradually, and then suddenly”. Risk aversion is the luxury of the financially secure – which TT is not.
Too often we attack our political system for rewarding populism. This tax is hardly that. It is in fact almost universally unpopular – which is why it has been treated as a hot potato, tossed from one party to the other.
But tax like this is good news for our political system. When more people are directly paying taxes, it will make us even less forgiving of poor execution, infrastructure, or governance. This is a policy that will strengthen our longer-term institutions. Young people should celebrate that.
We need to start taking more measured, calculated business risks that play to our strengths in strong export industries. The property tax can be the nudge we need to get moving.
Kiran Mathur Mohammed is an economist and co-founder of medl, an IDB Lab and Microsoft-backed social impact health tech company. Send feedback to kmmpub@gmail.com.
https://newsday.co.tt/2021/09/23/proper ... bago-needs
This has to be the most jackass utterance ever made in the entire history of the English language.
So, say I pay 4M for a property, and renting it out for 6K/m, but can't find tenants to occupy it, but I cool with it remaining unoccupied.
But because of increased property taxes, I will lower my rent rate to allow a younger probably more irresponsible person that may eventually not be able to pay my reduced rent in a timely and consistent manner long term, just so I can get some money to pay the increased property tax? Or I go sell it for a loss just to get away from having to pay the property tax? And that is how they plan to stimulate economic growth and movement?
Anyway, in case allyuh didn't know
Politicians and their minions live by a motto, "if yuh can't blind them with brilliance, baffle them with bull$#!t".
Please note, politicians aren't known for their brilliance.
The red government is not in favour of people especially injun people that own multiple estates .Mmoney607 wrote:88sins wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:anyone feeling this?
Property tax: the economic booster Trinidad and Tobago needs
The government’s property tax could be the booster shot this economy needs.
I understand that sounds absurd. No one likes taxes. When you’re living in a country with widespread waste and graft, an instinctive willingness to raise the pitchforks against the taxman is even more understandable.
After all, surely higher taxes should discourage economic activity, not the other way around? And most times they do.
But this property tax is different.
The narrative so far, even from its supporters, is that the property tax is a necessary evil in order to buttress public finances during a downturn and pay for local services.
For its opponents, a tax is an affront, given the economic ravages of covid19.
What both sides are missing is that this could be a positive economic boost.
Context is necessary. A whole generation of investors has experienced 20 years of consistently rising property rises, artificially buoyed by oil and gas money. When growth tanked, along with the 2015 energy price crash, property prices held stable.
A large part of this is because there is very little cost to sitting on idle property. It is seen as an inflation hedge that is unlikely to decline very much in value.
The result – a significant over-investment in property. But that over-investment has not resulted in lower prices – because most owners just sit on their property, rather than sell or lower rents. The market therefore remains stagnant, and hundreds of millions if not billions are trapped in unproductive uses.
Just before 2015, a horde of businesspeople invested in gated-property developments in the $3-$4 million range. Many of these continue to sit idle – out of reach for young people. Most owners don’t even care if they don’t collect rent.
This has contributed to stagnation and decline in a developing economy that is in desperate need of productive, foreign-exchange-earning assets. Raising capital for a new business or an export-producing idea is that much harder when you’re competing against a property as an asset.
The property tax can change this. By imposing a cost on idle property owners will be incentivised to hustle either to sell or rent their property. In the first place, this will largely result in lower rents and prices for young people.
Crucially though, more people will start to look for alternative investments, such as private equity or local stocks or bonds. With mortgage-backed lending slightly less attractive, banks will equally be nudged towards lending to non-property investments, helping to unlock some of the $8 billion they had in excess cash reserves as of June 2021. The result could be an increase in economic activity.
By jolting investors and banks out of their risk-averse stupor, it can move the frontier of what people may consider investing in. Suddenly your niece’s environmentally-friendly packaging company or your nephew’s friend’s tech start-up looks more interesting.
Our mutual funds, brokerages, publicly traded companies, and others should take this as a new opportunity to roll out new investment options, and to deploy capital in more interesting forms of private equity.
Businesses need to get ready to be investible. Risk aversion isn’t entirely to blame. Deal-flow is just as much of a problem. Too many entrepreneurs still fail to demonstrate the potential of well-defined addressable markets, or even to present decent projections.
It is not just start-ups. Managers and owners should dust off their capital expansion plans. We should have thousands of investor-friendly businesses with pitch decks at the ready, preparing to scale.
Our economic system, from our overvalued currency to our antiquated labour laws to our forests of red tape, is designed to keep us from taking risks. Hemingway wrote that one goes bankrupt: “gradually, and then suddenly”. Risk aversion is the luxury of the financially secure – which TT is not.
Too often we attack our political system for rewarding populism. This tax is hardly that. It is in fact almost universally unpopular – which is why it has been treated as a hot potato, tossed from one party to the other.
But tax like this is good news for our political system. When more people are directly paying taxes, it will make us even less forgiving of poor execution, infrastructure, or governance. This is a policy that will strengthen our longer-term institutions. Young people should celebrate that.
We need to start taking more measured, calculated business risks that play to our strengths in strong export industries. The property tax can be the nudge we need to get moving.
Kiran Mathur Mohammed is an economist and co-founder of medl, an IDB Lab and Microsoft-backed social impact health tech company. Send feedback to kmmpub@gmail.com.
https://newsday.co.tt/2021/09/23/proper ... bago-needs
This has to be the most jackass utterance ever made in the entire history of the English language.
So, say I pay 4M for a property, and renting it out for 6K/m, but can't find tenants to occupy it, but I cool with it remaining unoccupied.
But because of increased property taxes, I will lower my rent rate to allow a younger probably more irresponsible person that may eventually not be able to pay my reduced rent in a timely and consistent manner long term, just so I can get some money to pay the increased property tax? Or I go sell it for a loss just to get away from having to pay the property tax? And that is how they plan to stimulate economic growth and movement?
Anyway, in case allyuh didn't know
Politicians and their minions live by a motto, "if yuh can't blind them with brilliance, baffle them with bull$#!t".
Please note, politicians aren't known for their brilliance.
But what's the point he trying to make about people just owning property but not doing anything with it? He trying to say that holding to property for the price to go up and then sell it?
Any right thinking person in this country should not want to pay any tax as long as Rowley is in power and is giving himself the power to do things like go to Australia with Stuart Young and buy two both with no proper Procurement procedure.
Mmoney607 wrote:
But what's the point he trying to make about people just owning property but not doing anything with it? He trying to say that holding to property for the price to go up and then sell it?
Any right thinking person in this country should not want to pay any tax as long as Rowley is in power and is giving himself the power to do things like go to Australia with Stuart Young and buy two both with no proper Procurement procedure.
Redman wrote:So yuh saying the crappy AG is able to outmaneuver the silk empowered UNC, to the point where he can slip clauses that require constitutional majority in to the bill after the simple majority vote.?
And it's only tuner that pick up on it.
Not the legal luminance that is the UNC
Not the independent bench
Not the Law Association.
Just tuner.
Sounds legit.
L
O
L
Mmoney607 wrote:88sins wrote:Duane 3NE 2NR wrote:anyone feeling this?
Property tax: the economic booster Trinidad and Tobago needs
The government’s property tax could be the booster shot this economy needs.
I understand that sounds absurd. No one likes taxes. When you’re living in a country with widespread waste and graft, an instinctive willingness to raise the pitchforks against the taxman is even more understandable.
After all, surely higher taxes should discourage economic activity, not the other way around? And most times they do.
But this property tax is different.
The narrative so far, even from its supporters, is that the property tax is a necessary evil in order to buttress public finances during a downturn and pay for local services.
For its opponents, a tax is an affront, given the economic ravages of covid19.
What both sides are missing is that this could be a positive economic boost.
Context is necessary. A whole generation of investors has experienced 20 years of consistently rising property rises, artificially buoyed by oil and gas money. When growth tanked, along with the 2015 energy price crash, property prices held stable.
A large part of this is because there is very little cost to sitting on idle property. It is seen as an inflation hedge that is unlikely to decline very much in value.
The result – a significant over-investment in property. But that over-investment has not resulted in lower prices – because most owners just sit on their property, rather than sell or lower rents. The market therefore remains stagnant, and hundreds of millions if not billions are trapped in unproductive uses.
Just before 2015, a horde of businesspeople invested in gated-property developments in the $3-$4 million range. Many of these continue to sit idle – out of reach for young people. Most owners don’t even care if they don’t collect rent.
This has contributed to stagnation and decline in a developing economy that is in desperate need of productive, foreign-exchange-earning assets. Raising capital for a new business or an export-producing idea is that much harder when you’re competing against a property as an asset.
The property tax can change this. By imposing a cost on idle property owners will be incentivised to hustle either to sell or rent their property. In the first place, this will largely result in lower rents and prices for young people.
Crucially though, more people will start to look for alternative investments, such as private equity or local stocks or bonds. With mortgage-backed lending slightly less attractive, banks will equally be nudged towards lending to non-property investments, helping to unlock some of the $8 billion they had in excess cash reserves as of June 2021. The result could be an increase in economic activity.
By jolting investors and banks out of their risk-averse stupor, it can move the frontier of what people may consider investing in. Suddenly your niece’s environmentally-friendly packaging company or your nephew’s friend’s tech start-up looks more interesting.
Our mutual funds, brokerages, publicly traded companies, and others should take this as a new opportunity to roll out new investment options, and to deploy capital in more interesting forms of private equity.
Businesses need to get ready to be investible. Risk aversion isn’t entirely to blame. Deal-flow is just as much of a problem. Too many entrepreneurs still fail to demonstrate the potential of well-defined addressable markets, or even to present decent projections.
It is not just start-ups. Managers and owners should dust off their capital expansion plans. We should have thousands of investor-friendly businesses with pitch decks at the ready, preparing to scale.
Our economic system, from our overvalued currency to our antiquated labour laws to our forests of red tape, is designed to keep us from taking risks. Hemingway wrote that one goes bankrupt: “gradually, and then suddenly”. Risk aversion is the luxury of the financially secure – which TT is not.
Too often we attack our political system for rewarding populism. This tax is hardly that. It is in fact almost universally unpopular – which is why it has been treated as a hot potato, tossed from one party to the other.
But tax like this is good news for our political system. When more people are directly paying taxes, it will make us even less forgiving of poor execution, infrastructure, or governance. This is a policy that will strengthen our longer-term institutions. Young people should celebrate that.
We need to start taking more measured, calculated business risks that play to our strengths in strong export industries. The property tax can be the nudge we need to get moving.
Kiran Mathur Mohammed is an economist and co-founder of medl, an IDB Lab and Microsoft-backed social impact health tech company. Send feedback to kmmpub@gmail.com.
https://newsday.co.tt/2021/09/23/proper ... bago-needs
This has to be the most jackass utterance ever made in the entire history of the English language.
So, say I pay 4M for a property, and renting it out for 6K/m, but can't find tenants to occupy it, but I cool with it remaining unoccupied.
But because of increased property taxes, I will lower my rent rate to allow a younger probably more irresponsible person that may eventually not be able to pay my reduced rent in a timely and consistent manner long term, just so I can get some money to pay the increased property tax? Or I go sell it for a loss just to get away from having to pay the property tax? And that is how they plan to stimulate economic growth and movement?
Anyway, in case allyuh didn't know
Politicians and their minions live by a motto, "if yuh can't blind them with brilliance, baffle them with bull$#!t".
Please note, politicians aren't known for their brilliance.
one eye wrote:Where is the evidence for money laundering and "thiefing" by government officials?
Why are there clean audit outcomes? They should have stumbled upon misuse by now.
If this government is so incompetent, inefficient and unable then UNC are dregs.
In their 5 year term they got busted on a number of corruption practices.
You can trace all that this government has done. If you dispute these facts you are no better than an antivaxxer.
one eye wrote:Where is the evidence for money laundering and "thiefing" by government officials?
Why are there clean audit outcomes? They should have stumbled upon misuse by now.
If this government is so incompetent, inefficient and unable then UNC are dregs.
In their 5 year term they got busted on a number of corruption practices.
You can trace all that this government has done. If you dispute these facts you are no better than an antivaxxer.
Redman wrote:Again with your made up tootz Dragon.
Blather on.
SuperiorMan wrote:Really surprised that people just accepting this....no bug protesting etc.
De Dragon wrote:Redman wrote:Again with your made up tootz Dragon.
Blather on.
What's made up arse?
Didn't 7 year degree, children denier, Arse Wari amend the legislation to require a simple majority for passage? You're the the champion LFD RFD PNM when it comes to dotish blind following and hypocrisy
Return to “Ole talk and more Ole talk”
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 136 guests