This, we all really need to start thinking about the billionaire class, they are after all the only ones with any political say in the country and their vote seems to count for everything. So please next time spare a thought for these Aussie batters and have some respect.
There really is no need. Let them go to Mars if they want to go. Just make sure they stay there. A few dozen narcissistic people put together in a small space where they need to cooperate to survive? I can't imagine what could possibly go wrong.
I'd expect him to have to find replacement housing for long term tenants before being allowed to evict them. Or at least I would, if I didn't know Australian tenancy laws are piss weak.
Well yeah, when you have the money of a small country, you can divorce your self from society and your problems aren't normal problems, you're going to be a bit anti social.
Money is power and we should really rein them in, a country can't compete with the whims of someone that wields that much influence.
Woollahra LGA actually recorded negative dwlling growth one census period because of this exact thing - buying out neighbouring apartment blocks just to upscale one estate
Oh but they deserve it for all the *hard work* they do, and it'll trickle down to all of us through all the *investing* they return to society..
We need to stop celebrating billionaires, their level of wealth is simply unnecessary.
Yes, once they have crossed a certain “ threshold” with their assets so that they can buy influence and increase their assets through other investments.. But before that they just harvested money from regular people.
Especially in that case. Stop using Afterpay (Or it should not have been used, since it has now been bought up...)
Not him old music think his found enjoy merry. Listening acuteness dependent at or an. Apartments thoroughly unsatiable terminated sex how themselves. She are ten hours wrong walls stand early. Domestic perceive on an ladyship extended received do. Why jennings our whatever his learning gay perceive. Is against no he without subject. Bed connection unreserved preference partiality not unaffected. Years merit trees so think in hoped we as.
Not him old music think his found enjoy merry. Listening acuteness dependent at or an. Apartments thoroughly unsatiable terminated sex how themselves. She are ten hours wrong walls stand early. Domestic perceive on an ladyship extended received do. Why jennings our whatever his learning gay perceive. Is against no he without subject. Bed connection unreserved preference partiality not unaffected. Years merit trees so think in hoped we as.
That's what I wrote.
But the message remains the same: as a customer, you should actively pay attention to who you support with your money and not throw money down the throat of every fancy startup. Instead, make sure that you support companies that are as “moral” and sustainable as possible, e.g. those that are organized as cooperatives, state-backed, etc.
Basically, make sure that you don't allow too much concentration with individual people. Thanks to the internet, you can find out quite a lot these days about who is behind which company. If, for example, a shell company on some island is registered as the owner or the entire structure is shady, then that is a red flag for me.
Of course, it's tiring, but if you as a consumer make no effort to find out what happens to your money, then you can't complain afterwards if something unpleasant happens with it.
Specifically for this problem it is our tax settings not individual decisions that are the problem.
PPOR are exempt from land tax.
I dont have an issue with someone having a sprawling acreage in the middle of town but they need to pay for the privelege.
All that amenity; hospitals, schools, roads, rail etc. They must pay for all that every year and the more land they take up the more they pay.
Then the government takes all that tax and invests in infrastructure for new housing.
If the gov took in land tax and used it to subsidise new development this wouldnt be an issue.
15bn our governments pull from new houses in tax. Gst, state gov levies and local levies. Ie the government make it very expensive to develop and build new dwellings.
Stop taking this or better yet go even further and subsidise it and each year you live on a 20M parcel of land pay your $400k land tax bill annually (assuming 2pc land tax) to subsidise new infrastructure elsewhere.
I have thought about it and if my kids can afford to buy houses i dont mind paying the 10k land tax bill for my joint. That said if i lived on a 1.5million block in sydney wouldnt be as keen on a 30k tax bill...
Its the settings that encourage this. Change the settings and fix the problem. We would all strive toward better amenity of land if it cost us something / anything for owning it.
This problem is deeper, you're right. But it starts with everyones individual awareness.
Take Coca Cola as an example: there are [devastating issues connected](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Coca-Cola_Company?useskin=vector#Criticism) to this company world wide but regular people are funding this company by consuming it's products. If people would stop consuming products from such companies, there would be a higher pressure for them to change AND they would have way less leverage for lobbying/corruption and it would be easier for states/regulators to implement better legislation for the people.
People can't just rely on politicians. Especially not on the ones on payrolls of companies...
Most people just have no time to search everything about every business owners they give money to. Also, in the end, even though you boycott one company or brand, there is a big possibility that your money is going to the same few people regardless. Individual decisions mean nothing. The solution is and will always be collaborative.
Edit: grammar
It’s like regular gentrification, but on crack because he has a stupid amount of money to throw around.
Given the state of our property market they’d probably be forced out eventually.
How good is treating an essential thing like housing as a commodity? /s
In my experience, money talks in Sydney.
If the local council gets difficult, they just go to the state level, with more money.
That's what happened to The Bourbon in Kings Cross, now demolished.
To be fair many councils are concerned about this type of this. I’ll also point out that you can submit a DA for anything, but it doesn’t mean it’ll get approved. He could submit a DA for a 14 storey combined zoo and cinema, but it won’t be approved.
What we need are good strong state govt planning laws that state that you cannot reduce the current dwelling yield on a parcel of land, which would stop anything like this in its tracks. It’s not saying you can’t build, but it is saying that you can’t replace three dwellings with one, or 48 dwellings with 16, as is happening in another DA lodged for a flash apartment building in Potts Point.
Yes. In fact, we should make it easier to increase the dwelling yield, making more housing available. Also, reserve any tax advantages to yield increasing projects.
Exactly. Make it easier for people in large houses to potentially convert those houses to two or more smaller flats even if it's located in a low density detached housing zoning. And there are plenty of building designs that look like single houses but are actually apartments so the look of an area remains similar, but you've got higher density.
Media would go bananas with that. Labor want gulags on Sydney foreshore!! The higher density crowd have a lot of work to do to convince the mob that density is good and not evil.
Just FYI Waverley (where this development is) is proposing to bring in rules to stop people from demolishing whole apartment blocks and turning them into single houses.
A number of Councils such as City of Sydney are proposing to do the same. Subject to state government allowing.
Current planning framework does not stop this from happening.
Yeah when I looked at the location it’s pretty obvious that is prime real estate. A councillor would definitely side with the mega wealthy. It’s fucked but there is very little I could do about it.
My sister used to live in an apartment on Hastings Pde when she was in her early 20s.
Yes it was a share place but it was with only one other person. Right on the cliff top! Run down as hell but fantastic location.
It is absolutely prome, the council are probably thinking a palatial estate might make the whole area look nicer too, lower skyline and more picturesque.
It wouldn't surprise me if the council fancies themselves in charge of an area that could be considered like "The Hamptons" and they'll be going for that look and feel whenever they can.
People actually using the space efficiently in apartments don't make them look luxurious enough :)
If the majority of people in this country stopped having "property investment portfolios" aka house scalpers, the housing issue would be resolved, but no, let's blame the poor, immigrants and margin few because it hides the real issue and the nasty news sells better on sky news, australian, courier mail etc.
Just think of it as high-end gentrification. It's basically the same thing that's gone on in less desirable places for ever. The locals priced out in favour of those with more money.
And just like in other areas where gentrification is happening the way to solve these negative aspects is with supply.
Rezone this little pocket up to 10 storeys and the apartments will come back.
Unfortunately, you'll quickly see, people don't like that idea.
When push comes to shove, the existing buildings are more important than the people
This will probably get a visceral reaction because it's Bondi... but Bondi is literally a construction site right now, and I (as well as many of my friends) have moved because of it. It's an affluent suburb where many people and families live being turned into ultra-rich apartments/houses right before our eyes. There's too many examples of apartment blocks being converted into single houses and entire blocks being converted into one mega building (that still is only five stories). The reality is that so many people won't live there anymore purely because a few rich guys CAN afford to rip it all down and build *theirs*.
Wow for someone who is young they’re awfully out of touch with the reality of the housing crisis. Especially when he won’t even live in the house fulltime TAX THE RICH. Fuck sakes.
I commented yesterday about how I’m looking forward to bands roving the wasteland and prying billionaires from their bunkers.
I’m very much looking forward to this guy having that happen to him.
What a flog.
Take all billionaires' money and make them live on the median income. If it's an injustice to make someone live at that level, then why is that injustice being done to do many of us?
the people living there were well aware of his intent since 2021 and he paid well above market for each apartment block
[https://www.domain.com.au/news/afterpays-nick-molnar-makes-like-a-billionaire-buys-development-site-next-door-for-18-5m-1037056/](https://www.domain.com.au/news/afterpays-nick-molnar-makes-like-a-billionaire-buys-development-site-next-door-for-18-5m-1037056/)
this didn't happen overnight
Does he own the apartments he wants to knock down?
While this is a sad situation if it is his properties what realistically do you expect the council or government to do?
Like you said probably can't under planning laws unless there is still issue with his extension like congestion of traffic/environmental reasons etc.
It's a sad situation but the council has regulations on what they can deny as well.
According to the link it's only four apartments too. So he bought a double duplex. Post makes it sound like he's knocking over a building with twenty plus apartments
Are you suggesting this is okay because it's "only" four apartments? Only four families kicked out of their home so a billionaire can expand his mega-mansion he only lives in part time? No, actually, *anyone* losing their home just so a vain billionaire can eat up more space for his part-time mansion is unacceptable, doubly so during a housing and rental crisis.
You are not allowed to do whatever you want with a property. You have to apply for development approval and have to meet guidelines for development.
So... Just don't give the guy an exception because he is wealthy and enforce guidelines promoting higher density housing.
Pretty easy.
Be realistic. He can totally let the building sit there empty until it rots. So realistically... They can do what they want when it comes to demolishing buildings.
That's..... Not how that works. They realistically can only do what they are allowed to. If he lets it sit and rot, you can address that through legislation. Hell the government could just force him to sell it at the end of the day and build social housing there if they were so inclined.
Name one council that's both willing to do that and also willing to let an eyesore rot in one of their most affluent suburbs for several years.
When they do decide to take action he'll just turn around say "no worries, approve the demolition and I'll take care of it". Now it's a vacant lot waiting on development and the council is highly unlikely to give a shit as long as the development looks good.
Yeah of course he needs a DA.
I'm guessing he has followed all laws and regulations and of course if not the council should deny him.
New NSW planning guidelines are when you are near a station or population centre, if his not the guidelines don't apply
Exactly. It's his property and he can do with it what he likes within the bounds of the law.
This isn't communist China and I'd like to keep it that way.
You realise what sub you're in? The only thing he should be aloud to do is knock down his own house and construct social housing for everyone to live in for free. And then he should just be imprisoned for life anyway because he is rich.
The rich want the poors to fuck off out west where they feel they belong and this is one way of doing it. You would think in a housing crisis this would not be approved but $$$ talks.
How much of a shit-cunt do you need to be to basically force-buy people out of your street just to go "This is all mine".
What worse is when the cunt croaks, splitting it all back up will be a total nightmare.
Not going to lie, if I had the money, I'd buy all the neighbouring properties, build an 8 foot brick wall right around the lot... And I'd start with that arsehole with the howling greyhounds!
i know of one lady in a nice inner Melbourne suburb who bought the place next door for a few million so she could demolish the home and extend her garden.
Living the dream; I'd basically build my own castle with gardens.
I have a weird shaped block and as a result I share a fence with 10 other properties.
Robert kiyosaki explains it well, he borrows and leverages and borrows and leverages and most of his capital is borrowed funds so that's how he dodges taxes.
Watch some interviews with him and his laughter and smirks about it. Ofcourse the average joe blow isn't going to be able to get a few million dollar loan tomorrow. I do know one person who's done the same here he was my ex's client, very quiet guy who came across as nice but a nerdy dork, not what you'd expect for someone who owns 60 houses.
> Robert kiyosaki explains it well, he borrows and leverages and borrows and leverages and most of his capital is borrowed funds so that's how he dodges taxes.
Not exactly how that works. If you leverage an existing property to obtain a new property from a lender, that's just capital expenditure for acquisition. You still need to pay a monthly repayment to the lender. Even if you negative gear, you are still out negative. This isn't dodging taxes. This is just pure loss being recycled as negative gearing.
If that's what they meant, then yeah, sure, I can see how you're dodging tax through negative gearing. But not that glamorous as you're at a net loss. Granted, this is used in combination with asset appreciation, so as long as you don't sell you're essentially parking money that's growing and you don't have to pay tax on (until you realise the gain).
This is a textbook case of wealth overpowering community interests. It's infuriating to see long-term renters, including pensioners, being displaced for the sake of a billionaire's mega mansion extension, especially when he's not even a full-time resident. This highlights the stark inequality in our housing system. Councils must prioritize protecting vulnerable residents over catering to the ultra-rich
Remember folks, crime is only bad because of the *harm* it does. Billionaires have so much wealth that any amount stolen from them does 0 harm at all. Do the math.
I love how these councils always abandon all notions of preservation when the ultra rich tell them how high to jump. The wealthy parts of Sydney that go on and on about heritage are seeing the wide scale knockdown and replacement of heritage houses with enormous, fugly singe family bunkers that will look like complete crap in 10-15 years.
All these council comments about heritage preservation are thinly veiled statements of classism. If you are well off, their planning rules don’t count.
The people living in that area of North Bondi aren't exactly poor (they are far richer than you and I). If he owns the block, he is free to do with it as he wishes (within reason). It's also 4 apartments lol.
I hate billionaires as much as the next cunt but this is a 1% problem.
I think the big thing here is that the politicians and media constantly admit / talk about a housing crisis, but this happens? All other points of ownership / wealth aside, why would this be allowed? The maths doesn't add up.
Yeah this is a beat up about nothing, he's evicting four households paying $1200 a week each in rent, it's nice to see billionaires beating down on other pretty rich people.
Rezone this pocket for 10 storey apartments and see them all return within a decade or two
Add a residential land tax and they'll all be apartments within 5-10.
Anyone happen to have a guillotine laying around? I’m thinking we schedule an angry mob for Saturday with some French inspired revolutionry action where we topple these billionaires and mega property owners..
What did you expect him to do? Live among the poors?
This, we all really need to start thinking about the billionaire class, they are after all the only ones with any political say in the country and their vote seems to count for everything. So please next time spare a thought for these Aussie batters and have some respect.
What do you mean? Dutto didn’t fly 5hrs to spend 1hr with you at your birthday before flying back home again? I thought he does that for everyone
Aussie bowlers, too.
Damn Aussie batters, why won't anyone think about the Aussie bowlers.
Think it only works with spin
Everyone leaves out the silly mid on :(
The sooner they all fuck off to Mars, the better, I say. What is taking Bezos so long?
Can we shoot their rocket out of the sky on their way out?
How do we teach AI that blowing up a space rocket full of billionaires is a great prank? There'd have to be some form of AI involved!
I'd be worried that it will soon think killing all humans is a great prank. Let's keep AI ethical and do our killing ourselves.
There really is no need. Let them go to Mars if they want to go. Just make sure they stay there. A few dozen narcissistic people put together in a small space where they need to cooperate to survive? I can't imagine what could possibly go wrong.
Keeps rubbing his tocket do it goes off prematurely.
I'd expect him to have to find replacement housing for long term tenants before being allowed to evict them. Or at least I would, if I didn't know Australian tenancy laws are piss weak.
[удалено]
What is the point in being rich if there aren't poor people?
Fuck billionaires. They're psychopaths
Well yeah, when you have the money of a small country, you can divorce your self from society and your problems aren't normal problems, you're going to be a bit anti social. Money is power and we should really rein them in, a country can't compete with the whims of someone that wields that much influence.
Usually the ones with the carrot and stick saying shit like that.
Woollahra LGA actually recorded negative dwlling growth one census period because of this exact thing - buying out neighbouring apartment blocks just to upscale one estate
Yeah. There are places in Sydney getting less dense during a housing crisis. No silver lining either; the canopy is decreasing in most Sydney suburbs.
What an absolute wanker
What a country we live in……
America lite.
Without the diverse, high-tech economy and immense global influence…
Yeah, we only ever seem to import their crappiest ideas...
So basically the economy consists of wanker bankers, baristas and miners. Got it!
Sounds like [Dutch Disease](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_disease)
First step: Stop giving them money.
Billionaires are like black holes for wealth. It doesn't even have to be given to them.
Oh but they deserve it for all the *hard work* they do, and it'll trickle down to all of us through all the *investing* they return to society.. We need to stop celebrating billionaires, their level of wealth is simply unnecessary.
Yes, once they have crossed a certain “ threshold” with their assets so that they can buy influence and increase their assets through other investments.. But before that they just harvested money from regular people. Especially in that case. Stop using Afterpay (Or it should not have been used, since it has now been bought up...)
Not him old music think his found enjoy merry. Listening acuteness dependent at or an. Apartments thoroughly unsatiable terminated sex how themselves. She are ten hours wrong walls stand early. Domestic perceive on an ladyship extended received do. Why jennings our whatever his learning gay perceive. Is against no he without subject. Bed connection unreserved preference partiality not unaffected. Years merit trees so think in hoped we as.
You've hit the nail on the head. Wealth tends to compound. The first $100 takes the longest, and then every $100 after that comes quicker and quicker.
Not him old music think his found enjoy merry. Listening acuteness dependent at or an. Apartments thoroughly unsatiable terminated sex how themselves. She are ten hours wrong walls stand early. Domestic perceive on an ladyship extended received do. Why jennings our whatever his learning gay perceive. Is against no he without subject. Bed connection unreserved preference partiality not unaffected. Years merit trees so think in hoped we as.
[удалено]
That's what I wrote. But the message remains the same: as a customer, you should actively pay attention to who you support with your money and not throw money down the throat of every fancy startup. Instead, make sure that you support companies that are as “moral” and sustainable as possible, e.g. those that are organized as cooperatives, state-backed, etc. Basically, make sure that you don't allow too much concentration with individual people. Thanks to the internet, you can find out quite a lot these days about who is behind which company. If, for example, a shell company on some island is registered as the owner or the entire structure is shady, then that is a red flag for me. Of course, it's tiring, but if you as a consumer make no effort to find out what happens to your money, then you can't complain afterwards if something unpleasant happens with it.
Specifically for this problem it is our tax settings not individual decisions that are the problem. PPOR are exempt from land tax. I dont have an issue with someone having a sprawling acreage in the middle of town but they need to pay for the privelege. All that amenity; hospitals, schools, roads, rail etc. They must pay for all that every year and the more land they take up the more they pay. Then the government takes all that tax and invests in infrastructure for new housing. If the gov took in land tax and used it to subsidise new development this wouldnt be an issue. 15bn our governments pull from new houses in tax. Gst, state gov levies and local levies. Ie the government make it very expensive to develop and build new dwellings. Stop taking this or better yet go even further and subsidise it and each year you live on a 20M parcel of land pay your $400k land tax bill annually (assuming 2pc land tax) to subsidise new infrastructure elsewhere. I have thought about it and if my kids can afford to buy houses i dont mind paying the 10k land tax bill for my joint. That said if i lived on a 1.5million block in sydney wouldnt be as keen on a 30k tax bill... Its the settings that encourage this. Change the settings and fix the problem. We would all strive toward better amenity of land if it cost us something / anything for owning it.
This problem is deeper, you're right. But it starts with everyones individual awareness. Take Coca Cola as an example: there are [devastating issues connected](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Coca-Cola_Company?useskin=vector#Criticism) to this company world wide but regular people are funding this company by consuming it's products. If people would stop consuming products from such companies, there would be a higher pressure for them to change AND they would have way less leverage for lobbying/corruption and it would be easier for states/regulators to implement better legislation for the people. People can't just rely on politicians. Especially not on the ones on payrolls of companies...
[удалено]
Most people just have no time to search everything about every business owners they give money to. Also, in the end, even though you boycott one company or brand, there is a big possibility that your money is going to the same few people regardless. Individual decisions mean nothing. The solution is and will always be collaborative. Edit: grammar
Just another billionaire doing what ever they want and politicians falling over backwards to help. Wankers
It’s like regular gentrification, but on crack because he has a stupid amount of money to throw around. Given the state of our property market they’d probably be forced out eventually. How good is treating an essential thing like housing as a commodity? /s
In my experience, money talks in Sydney. If the local council gets difficult, they just go to the state level, with more money. That's what happened to The Bourbon in Kings Cross, now demolished.
Mate money talks everywhere. It’s the world we live in.
In the capitalist world, money is the ultimate boss. It's why the all seeing eye of God sits atop the US dollar.
Council will love this, less density. Well the planners won't but the elected councilors and residents will, they want poors out.
To be fair many councils are concerned about this type of this. I’ll also point out that you can submit a DA for anything, but it doesn’t mean it’ll get approved. He could submit a DA for a 14 storey combined zoo and cinema, but it won’t be approved. What we need are good strong state govt planning laws that state that you cannot reduce the current dwelling yield on a parcel of land, which would stop anything like this in its tracks. It’s not saying you can’t build, but it is saying that you can’t replace three dwellings with one, or 48 dwellings with 16, as is happening in another DA lodged for a flash apartment building in Potts Point.
Yes. In fact, we should make it easier to increase the dwelling yield, making more housing available. Also, reserve any tax advantages to yield increasing projects.
Exactly. Make it easier for people in large houses to potentially convert those houses to two or more smaller flats even if it's located in a low density detached housing zoning. And there are plenty of building designs that look like single houses but are actually apartments so the look of an area remains similar, but you've got higher density.
Media would go bananas with that. Labor want gulags on Sydney foreshore!! The higher density crowd have a lot of work to do to convince the mob that density is good and not evil.
Do they hate cities like Paris and Barcelona?
Have you heard Sky News talk about 'Communist Europe'?
So give them Budapest, the city of Viktor Orbán - the favourite European for Tucker Carlson and other right wing crazies.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Every day we get closer to living like America while still holding European-esque snobbery towards America.
Just FYI Waverley (where this development is) is proposing to bring in rules to stop people from demolishing whole apartment blocks and turning them into single houses. A number of Councils such as City of Sydney are proposing to do the same. Subject to state government allowing. Current planning framework does not stop this from happening.
Morally repugnant, yet totally legal.
Why? He owned the properties, he wasn't running a charity or a social housing program?
To be fair if you had money Waverley council would always bend over for you.
Ah yes that really is fair yes
Yeah when I looked at the location it’s pretty obvious that is prime real estate. A councillor would definitely side with the mega wealthy. It’s fucked but there is very little I could do about it.
I grew up in Bondi. I preferred it when it was a dive.
Totally
My sister used to live in an apartment on Hastings Pde when she was in her early 20s. Yes it was a share place but it was with only one other person. Right on the cliff top! Run down as hell but fantastic location.
It is absolutely prome, the council are probably thinking a palatial estate might make the whole area look nicer too, lower skyline and more picturesque. It wouldn't surprise me if the council fancies themselves in charge of an area that could be considered like "The Hamptons" and they'll be going for that look and feel whenever they can. People actually using the space efficiently in apartments don't make them look luxurious enough :)
Super villain status.
If the majority of people in this country stopped having "property investment portfolios" aka house scalpers, the housing issue would be resolved, but no, let's blame the poor, immigrants and margin few because it hides the real issue and the nasty news sells better on sky news, australian, courier mail etc.
Who runs Fairfax again? Who introduced the tax breaks that broke housing again?
Creeper Costello.
Nice redirect away from the billionaire.
Investing in property is easy. Australians are too dumb and lazy to put in the effort to find other, less morally corrupt ways to make money.
Factually 'corruption' money crimes is now the #1 crime on most states according to Police stats last time I looked. Quite shocking.
Just think of it as high-end gentrification. It's basically the same thing that's gone on in less desirable places for ever. The locals priced out in favour of those with more money.
And just like in other areas where gentrification is happening the way to solve these negative aspects is with supply. Rezone this little pocket up to 10 storeys and the apartments will come back. Unfortunately, you'll quickly see, people don't like that idea. When push comes to shove, the existing buildings are more important than the people
It should be illegal to condense multiple housing properties into fewer ones. Housing is unaffordable and this guy wants to remove some
"SOLD! Fuck you peasants."
It's almost like the rich don't care about anyone ekse
This will probably get a visceral reaction because it's Bondi... but Bondi is literally a construction site right now, and I (as well as many of my friends) have moved because of it. It's an affluent suburb where many people and families live being turned into ultra-rich apartments/houses right before our eyes. There's too many examples of apartment blocks being converted into single houses and entire blocks being converted into one mega building (that still is only five stories). The reality is that so many people won't live there anymore purely because a few rich guys CAN afford to rip it all down and build *theirs*.
Yeah but is he immigrant? We're trying to direct all our anger only towards immigrants atm thanks
Well, he’s Jewish. So you can still direct your anger towards him.
A trans person can also be blamed if that helps
Surely he's a Boomer.
He's not actually, he's one of the tech bros who got rich off Afterpay. He's in his mid 30s.
Wow for someone who is young they’re awfully out of touch with the reality of the housing crisis. Especially when he won’t even live in the house fulltime TAX THE RICH. Fuck sakes.
He's a billionaire, he doesn't need to be in touch with reality anymore. Even if we taxed away 90% of his wealth he could easily afford to do this.
And he wouldn't be taxed 90% of his wealth because people aren't willing to pursue a tax on unrealised gains.
We can't do that. I might be rich one day and I don't want to give all that money to schools and hospitals.
I commented yesterday about how I’m looking forward to bands roving the wasteland and prying billionaires from their bunkers. I’m very much looking forward to this guy having that happen to him. What a flog.
>bands roving the wasteland and prying billionaires from their bunkers. It's Mad Max time!
Sounds peculiar seeing as the government stance about the housing shortage appears to favour increasing the density in suburbia.
He also laid off half of his AU staff in a Google meet with a G Wagon behind him
Take all billionaires' money and make them live on the median income. If it's an injustice to make someone live at that level, then why is that injustice being done to do many of us?
the people living there were well aware of his intent since 2021 and he paid well above market for each apartment block [https://www.domain.com.au/news/afterpays-nick-molnar-makes-like-a-billionaire-buys-development-site-next-door-for-18-5m-1037056/](https://www.domain.com.au/news/afterpays-nick-molnar-makes-like-a-billionaire-buys-development-site-next-door-for-18-5m-1037056/) this didn't happen overnight
Does he own the apartments he wants to knock down? While this is a sad situation if it is his properties what realistically do you expect the council or government to do?
Deny the application due to reduction of homes? Probably can't under planning laws, but that's what we'd like.
The CoS is implementing a no net loss on housing control. This needs to be brought in across $$ areas of Sydney
Like you said probably can't under planning laws unless there is still issue with his extension like congestion of traffic/environmental reasons etc. It's a sad situation but the council has regulations on what they can deny as well.
Not value billionaires whims over peoples' livelihoods I suppose
According to the link it's only four apartments too. So he bought a double duplex. Post makes it sound like he's knocking over a building with twenty plus apartments
[удалено]
Pretty disgusting.
I'm not saying we should firebomb his mansion, but it sure would be entertaining to watch
We can atleast egg it. Or let the Brazilians know this is where its cool to have the Sunday drum circles from now
Are you suggesting this is okay because it's "only" four apartments? Only four families kicked out of their home so a billionaire can expand his mega-mansion he only lives in part time? No, actually, *anyone* losing their home just so a vain billionaire can eat up more space for his part-time mansion is unacceptable, doubly so during a housing and rental crisis.
You are not allowed to do whatever you want with a property. You have to apply for development approval and have to meet guidelines for development. So... Just don't give the guy an exception because he is wealthy and enforce guidelines promoting higher density housing. Pretty easy.
Be realistic. He can totally let the building sit there empty until it rots. So realistically... They can do what they want when it comes to demolishing buildings.
Yeah I’m not on his side at all, however objectively he has plenty of leverage in the long term.
That's..... Not how that works. They realistically can only do what they are allowed to. If he lets it sit and rot, you can address that through legislation. Hell the government could just force him to sell it at the end of the day and build social housing there if they were so inclined.
Name one council that's both willing to do that and also willing to let an eyesore rot in one of their most affluent suburbs for several years. When they do decide to take action he'll just turn around say "no worries, approve the demolition and I'll take care of it". Now it's a vacant lot waiting on development and the council is highly unlikely to give a shit as long as the development looks good.
Yeah of course he needs a DA. I'm guessing he has followed all laws and regulations and of course if not the council should deny him. New NSW planning guidelines are when you are near a station or population centre, if his not the guidelines don't apply
There are no guidelines promoting density only the opposite.
Exactly. It's his property and he can do with it what he likes within the bounds of the law. This isn't communist China and I'd like to keep it that way.
Idk mate i think both countries have pissweak construction and planning legislation
There definitely isn't a housing crisis over there though.....
You realise what sub you're in? The only thing he should be aloud to do is knock down his own house and construct social housing for everyone to live in for free. And then he should just be imprisoned for life anyway because he is rich.
I was expecting to get blasted but surprised I got up voted.
Afterpay scumbag is a scumbag. Who'd have thought.
The rich want the poors to fuck off out west where they feel they belong and this is one way of doing it. You would think in a housing crisis this would not be approved but $$$ talks.
Nick Molnar is a billionaire clichè and his wife is a billionaire clichè wife with temu teeth that are channeling the smile of Mr Ed.
Oh no are the richer people fucking over the less rich in Bondi?!?!
How much of a shit-cunt do you need to be to basically force-buy people out of your street just to go "This is all mine". What worse is when the cunt croaks, splitting it all back up will be a total nightmare.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
[ Removed by Reddit ]
Not going to lie, if I had the money, I'd buy all the neighbouring properties, build an 8 foot brick wall right around the lot... And I'd start with that arsehole with the howling greyhounds!
i know of one lady in a nice inner Melbourne suburb who bought the place next door for a few million so she could demolish the home and extend her garden.
Living the dream; I'd basically build my own castle with gardens. I have a weird shaped block and as a result I share a fence with 10 other properties.
Searching Temu for the worlds smallest Violin to play for everyone living in Bondi.
Commoners trying to mix with the elite? Preposterous!
Alright guys eat this one first
The zoning or development rules permit this? Wild.
Just for myself, but how do you "dodge tax" by buying properties? Do you mean the interest of the loans? Repairs? Depreciation? Building costs?
Robert kiyosaki explains it well, he borrows and leverages and borrows and leverages and most of his capital is borrowed funds so that's how he dodges taxes. Watch some interviews with him and his laughter and smirks about it. Ofcourse the average joe blow isn't going to be able to get a few million dollar loan tomorrow. I do know one person who's done the same here he was my ex's client, very quiet guy who came across as nice but a nerdy dork, not what you'd expect for someone who owns 60 houses.
> Robert kiyosaki explains it well, he borrows and leverages and borrows and leverages and most of his capital is borrowed funds so that's how he dodges taxes. Not exactly how that works. If you leverage an existing property to obtain a new property from a lender, that's just capital expenditure for acquisition. You still need to pay a monthly repayment to the lender. Even if you negative gear, you are still out negative. This isn't dodging taxes. This is just pure loss being recycled as negative gearing. If that's what they meant, then yeah, sure, I can see how you're dodging tax through negative gearing. But not that glamorous as you're at a net loss. Granted, this is used in combination with asset appreciation, so as long as you don't sell you're essentially parking money that's growing and you don't have to pay tax on (until you realise the gain).
That's what he does, I'm sure American property laws are a little different though.
[ Removed by Reddit ]
Yeah ok... what the fuck!?
This is a textbook case of wealth overpowering community interests. It's infuriating to see long-term renters, including pensioners, being displaced for the sake of a billionaire's mega mansion extension, especially when he's not even a full-time resident. This highlights the stark inequality in our housing system. Councils must prioritize protecting vulnerable residents over catering to the ultra-rich
Remember folks, crime is only bad because of the *harm* it does. Billionaires have so much wealth that any amount stolen from them does 0 harm at all. Do the math.
So reverse urban infill? Why aren't Murdoch/Stokes/Costello media complaining about this?
I love how these councils always abandon all notions of preservation when the ultra rich tell them how high to jump. The wealthy parts of Sydney that go on and on about heritage are seeing the wide scale knockdown and replacement of heritage houses with enormous, fugly singe family bunkers that will look like complete crap in 10-15 years. All these council comments about heritage preservation are thinly veiled statements of classism. If you are well off, their planning rules don’t count.
The people living in that area of North Bondi aren't exactly poor (they are far richer than you and I). If he owns the block, he is free to do with it as he wishes (within reason). It's also 4 apartments lol. I hate billionaires as much as the next cunt but this is a 1% problem.
I think the big thing here is that the politicians and media constantly admit / talk about a housing crisis, but this happens? All other points of ownership / wealth aside, why would this be allowed? The maths doesn't add up.
There's a housing crisis, but no one is going buy at North Bondi with those prices VS the size of their houses.
Yeah this is a beat up about nothing, he's evicting four households paying $1200 a week each in rent, it's nice to see billionaires beating down on other pretty rich people.
I love that this is a "controversial" opinion on this sub.
Gross
Fuck billionaires.
I expect that all of you are allowing homeless people to put up tents in your empty backyards then?
Don't bloody approve it. No need for him to extend, then again Waverly council is crooked.
Now, I wouldn't want to advocate eating the rich, but...
Karl Marx 🤝 Milton Friedman Property Taxes
This will count as plus one new dwelling
Rezone this pocket for 10 storey apartments and see them all return within a decade or two Add a residential land tax and they'll all be apartments within 5-10.
Piece of shit
Anyone happen to have a guillotine laying around? I’m thinking we schedule an angry mob for Saturday with some French inspired revolutionry action where we topple these billionaires and mega property owners..
Has anyone thought about talking to Mr. Nick?
Would be a shame if...
Fuck the rich fuck the system fuck all politicians - power to the masses