In 2006, I sold my apartment in Bondi and moved to a one-bedroom single fronted working man's terrace in Waterloo. I invested the ungarnisheed amount into my superannuation fund; remember, this is 12 months before Costello gave the massive lurks to such an action. Why?
Everyone kept on saying that owning a house was an emotional not an intellectual decision: that investing in the markets was a more reasonable way of dealing with one's funds. But what if you have to leave your rented premises? What if it is sold from beneath you and you are tossed out onto the street? Yep ... that is a problem. But I also get to move when I am unhappy. I can live anywhere I choose with just two weeks notice.
I was not to know about the massive hike in rents; nor the massive slide in superannuation fund valuations. I have dealt with the former by renting a tumble-down terrace for $280 per week, an amount which has not changed since May 2006. However, I always pay on time, and the place has never looked so good. Indeed, Robert did not think it COULD look this good. He says it puts his place to shame. Goodo ... And the slide in superannuation values I have sort of coped with by investing in cash just before the GFC in September.
2 comments:
Whew I'm glad you beat the GFC with your super. I didn't but I am a lazy super investor ... I prefer to keep my money in property so I don't have to bother about the whims of the super laws and stock market.
I am between a cleft stick: I don't know what the CORRECT action to take is, I just know what action I have taken. And I know how close to retirement I am. They all have their drawback: property requires one pick the best time to sell and the best agent to flog the wares. It is much more emotional than simply investing - although that has had its share of emotion this year. My biggest hassle at the moment is not whether I have enough money invested or not (I have) but do I have the guts to stop the 9 t 5 (I don't).
Post a Comment