or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Australian Members
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Australian Members - Page 2572

post #38566 of 56376
Quote:
Originally Posted by herringbonePete View Post

Nice jacket. I see there are a phlethora of Barbours pertaining to be vintage 'Skyfall'on Ebay.

Most of which have velvet collars and are basically aged Bedales...

 

Thankyou. Yeah there are. Anyone in here a UK10? I have some shoes for sale.

post #38567 of 56376
Well, I'm 10.5 uk so if any of yours are too big they may be ok for me....... Also my bro in law is 10 uk so let us know what uou got?!
post #38568 of 56376
Im usually a uk 9 so if they run small, let us know what they are.
post #38569 of 56376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post

Negative gearing is a vexed issue.

On the one hand, as you say, it rewards failure - people are getting a tax deduction for consistently making a loss, in the hope that although they're making an ongoing loss the property will increase in value so they will be able to sell it at a profit down the track.

On the other hand, it's not as though real estate is the only investment that can be negatively geared - as an example, you can also take advantage of negative gearing when investing in shares, if the interest repayments on money that you have borrowed to purchase the shares exceeds the income that you receive from dividend payments.

Therefore, some investors say that it's a bit unfair that negative gearing for real estate is often singled out for criticism although, given our national obsession with real estate, that's hardly surprising!

Personally, I don't think that allowing negative gearing for existing properties makes much sense, as it is subsidising an unproductive asset. It would be better to change it so that negative gearing is only allowed on newly-built dwellings, so as to encourage investment in new housing stock. Alternatively, of course, negative gearing could be removed altogether so that the value of the investment has to stand on its own two feet, so to speak, instead of being subsidised by the government (and, by extension, by taxpayers who don't have investment properties).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Plestor View Post

You realize that all that negative gearing does is allow equitable treatment of losses between individuals and businesses. I'd rather not deal with (i.e. pay for) the number of small business tax returns if you removed it. JM why would you want to distort the market in favor of new development?

Two interesting perspectives here... I tend to fall on the JM side of the equation, especially as if neg gearing was abolished for everything except new housing stock this would serve to keep a lid on property / housing costs which would (ironically in a way) keep a lid on housing prices.

Plestor, I presume you're comment is referring to the fact that individuals would likely set up a company to invest in residential property if negative gearing into property wasn't available as a tax loss? I can't comment on how much this phenomenon would manifest with a change in rules, but I would have thought it might end up in the too hard basket for enough people that there was a net reduction in losses which you and I pay for?
post #38570 of 56376
And coming in a few days late on the TV series stakes:

Breaking Bad
Suits
Sons of Anarchy
Hustle

haven't seen Hustle mentioned (UK series about grifters to avoid confusion), but it is a little older. Storylines are quite well crafted though and it's interesting to watch the progression from a sartorial perspective across the 8 seasons of the show.

Can't really think of a 5th favourite off hand - did enjoy Skins and very early Shameless (before it became a soapie) and Peep Show was always hilarious in a cringing way...
post #38571 of 56376
Quote:
Originally Posted by globetrotter View Post

I'm going to be in Melbourne next week, I might be pretty busy so not sure I can meet up, but does anybody have any recommendations for new resteraunts, or places I might not have been? or anything going on on labor day?


thanks

If you're planning to visit doublemonk I'd suggest wandering a little further down Smith St and grabbing a Pattie Smash burger from Rockwell & Son - the best 'dude food' in Melbourne imho.
post #38572 of 56376
Quote:
Originally Posted by herringbonePete View Post


FYI, Barbour jackets currently 1/2 off at DJs online.
post #38573 of 56376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Sy View Post
 

Shouldn't that imply they are too big, as they are slipping, which is causing the leather to rub against your skin leading to blisters?

 

If it was snug, it wouldn't slip!

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post



MS, not quite.

Thankfully, I've never had ankle blisters, but shoes that are too small can cause blisters, simple because they are too tight and thus rub against parts of your foot that they would not normally rub against.

Coxsackie and md2010 - I suspect that you've considered this already, but please bear in mind that the shoes might not be too small (or too large) per se, but that the shape of the last might just not suit your feet.

Also (particularly Coxsackie, as I remember that you bought a couple of pairs of shoes recently), at the risk of sounding patronising, do bear in mind that some shoes do take a bit of wearing in, and so some applications of leather conditioner (if they are calf, not suede) and some periods of wearing them around indoors for an hour or so a day (rather than wearing them for a full day) might help to break them in so that they are more comfortable.

Of course, neither of the above points may be applicable and perhaps the shoes are just the wrong sizes for your feet.

 

Journeyman is right. With my GG loafers, the collar in particular rubs against my upper heel/lower ankle. I don't think it's a last problem as the shoes actually do feel lovely and snug all round, but I definitely could have gone a half size up - however, this was the last pair in the store (American Tailors, and the shoes were discounted by 70% that day). To make matters worse, these shoes are just screaming to be worn without socks - which exacerbates the collar-rub problem. Leather against leather, don't you know.

 

I've also recently bought a pair of Pal Zileri brown suede tassel loafers - again, heavily discounted, last pair in the store - which are definitely a half-size too small.

 

Both pairs of shoes have stretched and become more comfortable with time and wear, and I think they'll be fine. Ironic that I tried both pairs on in-store, so I can't use the "online purchase" excuse.

 

I fixed the Santoni heel slippage by gluing a piece of padded suede to the inside of the heel counter. Works a treat.

 

It's all good.

post #38574 of 56376

Back in Shanghai again. It's China National Day holiday here, and I celebrated by eating Turkish food with Australians while wearing Italian clothes.

 

 

Visible at bottom are those slightly-too-small Pal Zileri loafers, which felt fine today. The rest of the outfit is basically Canali, some of it bought during their last sale. However, I paid full price for the jacket last week. Ouch.

post #38575 of 56376

Need a black cap-toe oxford for an internship at the start of next year. I'm a size 7 in Loake. Should I order a pair of Loake 1880 Aldwych delivered from Herring or get a pair of AE Park Avenues from the US when I go there for Christmas?

post #38576 of 56376
thanks for the kind words Journeyman, the pleasure was all mine.


thanks for the recommendation, SuttonZach
post #38577 of 56376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coxsackie View Post


I've also recently bought a pair of Pal Zileri brown suede tassel loafers - again, heavily discounted, last pair in the store - which are definitely a half-size too small.


It's clearly a subjective choice, but I always buy loafers a half-size down from my usual size. They're uncomfortable at first but as they stretch and soften a bit with wear, they fit really well.

I made the mistake of buying a pair of really nice tobacco suede loafers by Cheaney for Herringbone at a Herringbone warehouse sale a couple of years ago, when they were clearing out the last of the stock, in my usual size. They felt really good the first time I wore them, but the next time I wore them they flopped about all over the place as they were just too big, as there were no laces to tighten to hold them onto my feet. I've never worn them since! I really should get around to selling them, as they're in pristine condition.
post #38578 of 56376
Quote:
Originally Posted by acinod View Post

Need a black cap-toe oxford for an internship at the start of next year. I'm a size 7 in Loake. Should I order a pair of Loake 1880 Aldwych delivered from Herring or get a pair of AE Park Avenues from the US when I go there for Christmas?

They are very different looking shoes with similar qualities, which one do you like?

I got a comparison in the black cap toe oxford thread, link is in my signature.
post #38579 of 56376
jM, have you tried some full sock or tongue pad for the loafers?
post #38580 of 56376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxhound View Post

Thankyou. Yeah there are. Anyone in here a UK10? I have some shoes for sale.

What width last and make?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Australian Members