1 in 10 houses being bought by overseas buyers

Written By: - Date published: 8:00 am, March 15th, 2013 - 96 comments
Categories: housing - Tags:

A survey of real estate agents has revealed that 9% of house sales result in the house going to an overseas buyer. Half say they plan to come and live here – that leaves 5% going to overseas investors. For some reason, the BNZ is trying to pretend that’s a small number. I find it a staggering number. Until now, I would have guess maybe 1 in 50 house sales went to overseas buyers.

Immigrants are welcome. Absentee landlords who add nothing to the country but leech its wealth and increase house prices are not.

5% additional demandt has a huge impact on the market. It’s a like a traffic jam, it’s not the first 95% of cars that are the problem, it’s the 5% too many. If we removed 5% of the demand from the housing market, homes would be more affordable for Kiwis.

How? Do what the Aussies do – don’t allow overseas persons to buy a house unless they are adding to the housing stock. Simple.

[btw, I see Farrar pointing out that the largest nationality within the overseas buyer group is Brits. He writes “Will we hear the parties of the left going on about banning Brits from buying property in New Zealand?”. Yes, Farrar. Of course. Overseas persons means all overseas persons. It’s only your latent racism that would take foreigners to mean only Chinese]

96 comments on “1 in 10 houses being bought by overseas buyers”

  1. handle 1

    This is an unscientific ‘survey’, not a real one. Not that we would know from the reporting.

  2. Grumpy 2

    That is because peoplevare escaping countries ruined by the policies of the left. U.K., South Africa etc.

    • karol 2.1

      huh? The UK hasn’t had a left wing government since the 1970s.

    • Descendant Of Sssmith 2.2

      Yeah apartheid was a much better system.

    • Lightly 2.3

      sigh

      this has nothing to do with people leaving countries to come to NZ.

      It’s. About. Overseas. Buyers. Who. Aren’t. Coming. To. NZ

    • The Al1en 2.4

      That’s no problem if they live here in the homes they buy.

      The talking point should be why they glue themselves north of the Bombays.

    • Tim 2.5

      Oh how history repeats.
      Next thing ya know we’ll be having a load of ‘pommie bastards” running all our government departments with little ‘wive-ies’ making ads for GJ Homes, whilst Nullner degreed folk run the equivalent in OZ …. and a few Murries making what they think is a big earn in mines and labouring.

      All the while Key will be crowing about how forn vestmunt [foreign investmetnt] is pain off en the konomy is on trek [paying off and the economy is on track], after the “OVERWHELMING” success of his Seth Merikin trip where by he can quote a number of mights and maybees given by various buzniss leaders.

  3. Res Publica 3

    I think the talk of foreign investors driving up house prices is a bit of a red herring (no pun intended)

    A better question to ask is why do we persist with propping up fundamentally flawed housing market that can’t cope with with domestic demand let alone foreign investment? I don’t think simply banning foreigners from buying houses is going to fix the fact we trusted developers to, you know, develop, and are now paying the price.

    We are much better off adressing the issue of housing affordability through quality, compact development that gives all New Zealander’s the chance to buy their own home rather than dog-whistling about the yellow peril.

    Leave the anti-immigration dogma to Winston and Prosser the Tosser

    • felixviper 3.1

      Nothing to do with immigration. Why would you bring that up?

      • Colonial Viper 3.1.1

        Res Publica talks about foreign investment as if it’s all good for NZ.

        It’s not.

        Just like letting foreigners buy your house and renting it back to you isn’t good.

  4. vto 4

    Letting foreigners own land provides no benefit whatsoever, only detriment. If they want to invest in business they can, fine, but not own land. They can lease land or something similar, but there is no requirement to own land – unless they are being deceitful about it.

    Similarly with homes. What is the point in having foreign landlords? What is the benefit?

    All foreigners should be banned from owning land in NZ, especially the bloody poms. They are worse than the Chinese. And the yanks.

    What it does do of course is drive the price of houses up, which means more debt has to be taken on by New Zealanders to buy their own home. And that extra debt equals more of our daily toil going to the banks – yahooo…. Imagine if all property prices were lower….. far less of our daily toil would have to go to paying for the roof over our heads and far more would be available for everthing else.

    Don’t expect this government to do a single thing about it though.

    This is the main pull towards the Greens for me – my vote swings on it, that is how significant this issue is for the country, imo.

    • The Al1en 4.1

      “All foreigners should be banned from owning land in NZ, especially the bloody poms. They are worse than the Chinese. And the yanks.”

      Being English, birthright dictates that firstly I correct you rankings 😆

      before telling yo to fuck off, racist. 😉

      • vto 4.1.1

        ha ha, fair enough. Was just a poke and a dig at the whole “preferred immigrants” bullshit.

        I don’t mind the english, except for what they did to my ancestors – ggrrrrr…..

        • The Al1en 4.1.1.1

          “I don’t mind the english, except for what they did to my ancestors – ggrrrrr…..”

          Me too, you wanna read about what they did to mine.

          “a ha, fair enough. Was just a poke and a dig at the whole “preferred immigrants” bullshit.”

          And a rare win for the inventor of the smiley :thumb:

      • Tim 4.1.2

        LOL – fair enough ….. see above – oh how history repeats!…
        I do understand your feelings though – especially given the likes of a Cameron regime in the UK and its TRUE attitude to the “un-British” (and btw, many of those “Un-British” having fought their fucking wars for them and been killed off in the process, THEN being treated like serfs if and when they wish to participate in the UK economy).
        Until recently, I was thinking the idea of dual citizenship was a very sensible idea aand all very ‘adult’.
        Having said that though, I wonder how many of the ‘poms’ you refer to would be comfortable if they had to choose between NZ citizenship and UK citizenship – i.e. in the sense of having to commit and participate in the NZ economy.

        Which btw leads me to another thought ….. does anyone know if John Key has dual NZ/US citizenship?

    • Draco T Bastard 4.2

      If they want to invest in business they can, fine, but not own land.

      I don’t see any reason to allow them to do that either. All it does is result in the wealth of our work being shipped overseas – just the same as absentee landlords does.

      Imagine if all property prices were lower….. far less of our daily toil would have to go to paying for the roof over our heads and far more would be available for everthing else.

      Imagine if the banks no longer could charge interest on creating money then all prices would drop significantly and far less of our daily toil would go to supporting the parasitic rich. And all that needs to be done to achieve this wonderful outcome is to have the government create money and ban the banks from doing so.

      • vto 4.2.1

        Yes DtB, you have always maintained that the ban on foreign ownership should extend to everything. I am not so sure about that but happy to be convinced. I am most certainly convinced on the land ownership issue though.

        A tenant community is a weak community. An owned community is a strong community.

        • Draco T Bastard 4.2.1.1

          I am not so sure about that but happy to be convinced.

          It’s exactly the same argument as the land issue.

          A foreign owned business will have a say in the community without being part of the community and will draw down the wealth of that community through the dead weight loss of profit and will give nothing for it. Money is nothing but a tool used to help distribute the resources of the community and, as such, the community itself can supply all of the money that it needs by the simple expedient of printing it.

          The only time that foreign investment would be advantageous would be when it brings something that the community didn’t have previously and even then it is better if the community just buys it because then it won’t be subject to the dead weight loss of profit.

          An owned community is a strong community.

          Bad phrasing – an owned community would be the tenant community. A community that owns itself is the strong community.

        • karol 4.2.1.2

          vto: A tenant community is a weak community. An owned community is a strong community.

          As a renter I call BS on that one. It’s one of the (righteous) myths used to continually fuel the home ownership bubble, and to put down us renters. And that home ownership is more about self/family interest over community interests.

          • vto 4.2.1.2.1

            Maybe I phrased it badly as DtB notes above. What is being suggested is that when people have a stake in something it tends to encourage a greater value (not money) being placed in it, with subsequent stronger roots going down and leading to greater care for the community. I don’t think this is anything new – it applies all across humankind. In a job, in a sports team, in a school, in housing. When you give someone an ownership stake in something the performance s generally always better, and that applies to housing and communities as well. Tenant communities tend to be more transient as well, leading to less strength.

            My point is not intended to be disparaging of renters, merely to highlight some points about it. Happy to be proved wrong, if you got some evidence. My point is also not intended to have anything to do with property bubbles. The intention is in fact the opposite – to bring prices down to a level where pretty much anyone who wishes to do so can buy a home and make it their own.

            • karol 4.2.1.2.1.1

              If anything, I think home ownership encourages conservatism and the tendency to favour the status quo.

              • vto

                Sure, of course those things would arise from ownership too. Those things have good qualities in certain circumstances.

            • AmaKiwi 4.2.1.2.1.2

              @ vto

              No. Fact: We have not had a positive balance of trade for 30 years! (Just like Greece.) The value of what we export is greater than what we import BUT we lose in the money we send overseas in the form of interest payments, dividends, insurance, etc.

              In other words, if we owned all our land and all our businesses, we would have a very healthy balance of trade.

              Foreigners buying up our houses to rent back to us is one more nail in our economic coffin. It also contributes to the high value of our currency.

              • vto

                Agreed and not sure what you were disagreeing with.

                • AmaKiwi

                  vto – my apologies. Between getting kids to bed, feeding dogs, and recovering from a hectic week I misinterpreted your comments.

  5. TheContrarian 5

    Farrar himself isn’t racist…some of his commentators though…jesus…

    • TheContrarian 5.1

      Besides it would appear Farrar is implying that the left is racist towards the Chinese given the uproar over Crafar farms. That’s how I read it

      • vto 5.1.1

        Yes that is clearly the deception that Farrar is trying to deceive with. An honest assessment however would clearly note that the call to ban foreigners from owning land has never once turned on the particular foreigner’s race.

        But Farrar is a known liar and lays out deception after deception after deception.

        Farrar is a liar.

        • TheContrarian 5.1.1.1

          The comment “Yes, Farrar. Of course. Overseas persons means all overseas persons. It’s only your latent racism that would take foreigners to mean only Chinese” should probably be edited because it is potentially slanderous given that he isn’t suggesting foreigners to mean only Chinese

          • framu 5.1.1.1.1

            except when he is

            “Farrar is implying that the left is racist towards the Chinese”

            • TheContrarian 5.1.1.1.1.1

              He isn’t suggesting “foreigners to mean only Chinese” and is taking a dig at left complaining about Chinese ownership and not other nationalities (rightly or wrongly).

              The bracketed comment is false.

              • framu

                yeah – your right – what im getting at is hes using racism (whether he is racist or not isnt the point) to tar others and misrepresent an argument.

                and its an argument he bloody well knows he is misrepresenting

                which to me is pretty much at the same level as being just plain racist

              • framu

                bah – no edit

                he is suggesting foreigners to mean only Chinese, because thats the accusation he is making, when he knows it to be false

                • TheContrarian

                  He is pointing out that Brits are also foreigners but is accusing the left of focusing solely on Chinese. It is pretty simple and I don’t how anyone could misunderstand it without doing so purposely

                  • framu

                    “accusing the left of focusing solely on Chinese”
                    \
                    when he bloody well knows that that accusation is false! – thats the point.

                    It is pretty simple and I don’t how anyone could misunderstand it without doing so purposely

                    • TheContrarian

                      Yes I know that is false. But the accusation here is that Farrar takes foreigners to mean only Chinese. Which is the complete opposite of the blog-post.

                    • Draco T Bastard

                      No, Farrar accuses the left of using the word foreign to mean Chinese when we have always said that foreign = foreign. It is the political-right’s, of which Farrar is one, which has tried to muddy the waters and impugn the left which has used the word foreign to mean Chinese.

                      In other words, they’re lying.

                    • TheContrarian

                      Yes – I agree that’s what he is doing but the paragraph itself reads as if Farrar is a latent racist for holding that opinion himself

                    • felixviper

                      Farrar’s argument strongly suggests that he’s a racist because it would only make sense to a racist.

                      It’s a very revealing comment.

                    • Colonial Viper

                      I’d be surprised if Farrar was significantly racist. I suggest that he’s playing the angles on the assumption that there is still a significantly racist streak in NZ. Research, if you like.

                    • felixviper

                      Yeah but he’s not significantly anything.

                      He does however run a horrible racist blog where he has been encouraging horrible racists to say horrible racist things on a horribly regular basis for several horrible years.

                      Whether or not he, in his own mind, holds to an articulated racist philosophy is neither here nor there when his actions are examined.

                  • framu

                    see petes comment below

                    Pete 5.1.3.1
                    15 March 2013 at 10:50 am

      • Lightly 5.1.2

        to argue that the Left is only concerned about Chinese foreign investment, you need to to ignore the uproar over the Canadian Pension plan’s attempt to buy Auckland Airport inter alia.

      • ghostwhowalksnz 5.1.3

        Farrar was very quiet about the National partys racist detour under Don Brash.

        Whats is called when you see phony racism amoung opposition parties but keep quiet when its under your nose.
        Hes just a mischief maker

        • Pete 5.1.3.1

          It’s classic cynical politics. Take your side’s biggest vice and accuse your opponents of the very same thing. That way you go on the attack and your opponents are stuck with saying “No, you are”, which is just as effective in public life as it is on the playground.

          • ghostwhowalksnz 5.1.3.1.1

            The funny part is , he then takes up the cudgel of ‘scaremongering’ in another post.

    • Poission 5.2

      Farrar structured the argument to formulate an ill posed problem ie the argument is Ad Hominem and irrelevant to the problem

    • freedom 5.3

      you have proof of this ?

      • freedom 5.3.1

        above is actually a response to “Farrar himself isn’t racist”
        ( better concentrate harder now we have no edit 🙁 )

      • Poission 5.3.2

        The heading of his post ie the smoking pixel.

    • Tim 5.4

      “Farrar himself isn’t racist…some of his commentators though…jesus”…”
      ….. kind of like:
      I’m not racist – some of my best friends are Mayories

    • QoT 5.5

      “Farrar himself isn’t [X] … some of his commentators though” is the entire point of Kiwiblog. DPF’s utter lack of any sense of responsibility for the hateful shit he allows to go on in comments is actually the only thing I utterly, truly hate about him.

      (Oh, but there’s a downvote system!!! And sometimes he gives magical demerits!!!!) *headdesk*

  6. vto 6

    What is the benefit in having high capital values for anything at all?

    There is just one benefit – it suits the banks. There is no other benefit that I am aware of.

    • DH 6.1

      “There is no other benefit that I am aware of.”

      It suits the local asset owners very nicely thanks very much.

      It has parallels with the carry trade that’s been pushing up our currency. With that trade overseas ‘investors’ borrow money from a country with low interest rates and invest it in a country with high interest rates. When measured against an economic stability rating NZ has among the highest interest rates of all countries so we attract a lot of these market players. They have to buy $NZ to invest here which pushes up the $NZ.

      With our interest rates being higher the rents on property are equally higher so houses and commercial properties are an attractive investment for the smarter foreigners with a bit of spare cash to invest, especially those from low-interest nations. Money in the bank or Govt bonds earning interest doesn’t earn any capital gain, NZ properties do so they make a very good currency hedge and a nice little earner.

      Govt can reduce it, even put a stop to it, by raising the non resident withholding tax.

      • vto 6.1.1

        DH, what you have outlined there seems to support my contention that high values are only good for the banks (read finance).

        There is no other benefit.

        This is why, for example, New Zealand’s second largest cooperative Foodstuffs limits the capital value of its supermarkets. They place constraints on that value so that the burden of ownership is reduced to free up energy and resources for its actual purpose of selling food. Foodstuffs embraces core left ideals such as collectivist ownership and limits on capital, yet how many of them would vote to the left I wonder….

        • ropata 6.1.1.1

          Number of owner occupied dwellings in the pre super City territorial authorities, as of 2001:
          Auckland City: 68 481
          Manukau City: 50 799
          All of NZ: ~860 000

          Owner-Occupier Rate %, for all of NZ
          1991 : 73.8 %
          1996 : 70.7
          2001 : 67.8

          Clearly home ownership across NZ has been falling, and probably catastrophically collapsed in the last 10 years, but we will see what comes out of the 2013 census.

          I bet if we take out the retired folks from the statistics we will see much worse ownership stats, and an awful lot of young families locked out of the market.

          Current owners are all too happy for prices to continue inflating at 10% per year, and they will vote to defend their free money ponzi scheme.

  7. DH 7

    “5% additional demandt has a huge impact on the market.”

    Yup, huger than most people realise. As we all know, houses are priced by perception. If you get one foreigner who values a house 10% higher than the locals he’ll only pay about $1000 more for it at an auction, because he just needs to win the bidding. Get two of those foreigners bidding against each other at the same auction and they’ll pay the full 10% more, pushing house prices up a whole lot more.

    5% will easily get foreign buyers bidding against each other, it’s a big number in demand terms when you’re looking at a finite resource like land.

  8. geoff 8

    Serf n Turf.
    Or rather no turf for the serf.
    Yes, as we already knew, Keewee homeowners are a bunch of gullible suckers who are dumb enough to think that increasing house prices means they are getting richer.

  9. Herodotus 9

    And this is new??
    Perhaps to those who have no idea what is happening in the real estate world. And it has been happening for over 10 years, perhaps not to the same extent as “kiwis” we’re able to compete due to all the credit that was available to all.
    Don’t be taken back when you hear of the breakdown of who has/is buying raw land to develop and who are building these new dwellings.
    Yet if we believe in the market, and as many believe that the property market is over heated then this is a short term issue and who will be burnt when the property market collapses ?

    • Rogue Trooper 9.1

      Wheeler asserts both
      -the property market is overheated
      -that the dollar may drop, In A Hurry
      -(oh, and thirdly, interest rates will rise, late 013, early 014)

  10. TheContrarian 10

    This comment makes no sense:

    “I see Farrar pointing out that the largest nationality within the overseas buyer group is Brits. He writes “Will we hear the parties of the left going on about banning Brits from buying property in New Zealand?”

    Farrar identifies that Brits are foreigners purchasing land in NZ

    Yes, Farrar. Of course. Overseas persons means all overseas persons. It’s only your latent racism that would take foreigners to mean only Chinese

    Farrar just said in the first sentence that foreigners include the Brits.

    It is a completely contradictory paragraph.

    • framu 10.1

      youve never heard of “projection”?

      a. The attribution of one’s own attitudes, feelings, or suppositions to others:

      its like anthropomorphising – but human to human

      whether the author is correct or not – the paragraph is correct if thats taken into account.

      As i read it farrar is being accused of projecting his own world view onto his opponents.
      However, I dont think thats completely the case – i think farrar is just being his usual decietfull, shit stirring self

      • TheContrarian 10.1.1

        It is a completely contradictory paragraph

        • One Tāne Huna 10.1.1.1

          No, it isn’t, unless you are completely unaware of recent NZ politics, or trying to be contrary for the sake of it.

          Farrar, like Hooten, says what he’s paid to say, and therefore “his” “opinion” isn’t worth shit.

          • TheContrarian 10.1.1.1.1

            Farrar is in no way suggesting “foreigners to mean only Chinese” when his whole fucking post is about foreigners who are NOT Chinese buying land.

            • framu 10.1.1.1.1.1

              what if it was kyle chapman saying “im not racist but….” would that be contradictory?

              • TheContrarian

                What has that got to do with anything?

                • framu

                  that peoples words and their actual motives and thoughts can contradict each other

                  • TheContrarian

                    That doesn’t change the fact that:

                    Farrar is in not way that foreigners means only Chinese people when his whole fucking post is about foreigners who are NOT Chinese buying land

                    • framu

                      Settle petal – you’ll hurt yourself

                      Should you take anything any politician or their paid muck rakers say at face value?
                      Or is it wiser to consider their history, the company they keep, their motives etc etc?

                    • ropata

                      you conveniently forget the 3News beat up and the torrents of dishonest spew from farrago and the oily whale boy

            • ghostwhowalksnz 10.1.1.1.1.2

              So hes playing the xenophobia card while accusing others of playing the racist card, with a fall back of the scaremongering card.

              All in all a typical day at the office for Nationals ‘pants on fire’ pollster

    • Draco T Bastard 10.2

      Farrar just said in the first sentence that foreigners include the Brits.

      He’s subtlety reminding people of the recent sale of the Crafar Farms to China and thus the strong implication being that we’re really only bothered about Chinese buyers which is wrong and he knows it.

      • TheContrarian 10.2.1

        Yes I know what he is doing but it reads as if Farrar himself is latent racist for suggesting foreigners to mean only the Chinese.

        But whatever – I’m going to get some lunch

  11. johnm 11

    The Market strikes again and our young people wanting to buy their first home find it even more impossible. Greed is far more important than they are. 🙁 Not to mention all the scum bags monopolising the market by buying up more houses to make a capital gain. Not pretty!

  12. Watching 12

    I wonder how many of those foreigner buyers are long term ex-pat kiwi with a 2nd passport. There is a tax issue for those that understand the non-residence tax status for Kiwis living permanently overseas.

    Some of you should go back to 2000-2004 when the NZ dollar was low (if I recall I got about 1GBP to NZ3.10 to buy my house) and work how many long term ex-pat kiwi’s will start buying property again in NZ. This time around the tidal wave of returning Kiwis baby boomer heading south in the next 10 years with a lower NZ dollar will have a significant impact on house prices. Some are planning to buy and return and some are planning to buy but divide their time between NZ and overseas – but a lot are looking and the NZD rate is the critical point.

    Also don’t forget that a number of those baby boomers have had children born and still live/work overseas who maybe British, Irish etc but also Kiwis – now in their 30’s will be looking to buy property here with a lower NZD. I wrote this paragraph as baby boomer and a former long term ex-pat kiwi with a 2nd passport, and hearing what my friends & their families are planning to do in the next decade.

    In that period of 2000-04 with a low NZD I thought the number of long term ex-pat kiwis buying property in NZ was significant.

    • Tony 12.1

      Nah. Pretty irrelevant comment sorry. If you’re a NZ national you’re not suddenly going to hide behind a British passport and say you’re from Leeds or whatever. I doubt those figures include ex-pats, the numbers are there the question is whether we accept foreigners profiting off our over-inflated property market.

    • xtasy 12.2

      The bulk of “Kiwis” with other passports would never bother coming back to live here, mate. You are dreaming to think like you do. I met many in Europe, they have given up NZ as their home, it offers them NADA of self worth and opportunities or jobs, they do better all over the world, rather than in NZ. This is the bloody reality. Had I listened to good advice, I would never have come back here a few years ago, and I am sure, my health would be a heck of a lot better now.

      I feel sorry for some that live here in virtual 3rd world conditions, as they are really having a shit hope show, as NZ governments, no matter what side, will NEVER deliver first world health care, as they have not the means and will not force taxes to pay for it.

      NZ is a 50 to 60 per cent society, where the ones managing somehow have betrayed the rest, to live on low wages and shit living standards, so they can have a reasonable lifestyle. Just having ghettoes like Mangere and Otara make NZ NO DIFFERENT to the USA. You are largely self righteous (the middle class and right), but you have little morals.

      I have little respect for Kiwis believing that their country is so “great”!

  13. Rich 13

    I suspect if they bought property at home, their governments might tax them on the capital gains. Here, they can make tax free money.

  14. Tony 14

    I support your additional note regarding Brits – we have no preferential treatment in the UK, it should be the same for them in NZ.

  15. Rogue Trooper 15

    even the tullyvuzion claimed

    UK originated buyers 18%
    China originated buyers 15%
    Aussie dingos-14%

  16. Colonial Weka 16

    “Immigrants are welcome”

    Except not all immigration is good or useful to NZ. The exchange rate works in favour of immigrants from some countries, drives up property prices in NZ, hence favouring wealthy-ish immigrants over less wealthy locals.

    The immigrants aren’t the problem, it’s our immigration policies.

    (and because it apparently needs to be said, I’m not thinking about Asian immigration when I write this post, it’s the Brits and the Americans that have been pushing up prices in the part of the country I live in).

  17. AsleepWhileWalking 17

    *This is an outrage*

    Missing from your post is how the government then sends our money overseas to the investor via the accommodation supplement which I feel has made this situation far worse.

    When the AS was originally brought in the idea was that low income earners would have free choice between HNZ and private housing. Then the “excess stock” of HNZ homes could be sold off. Several community groups such as the Salvation Army predicted this would herald the beginning of rapidly rising rental costs….surprise, surprise!

    We need immediate action to halt this shipping off of money and disadvantaging our own people, like NOW.

    • xtasy 17.1

      AWW: WHAT NZ needs is to take charge of its affairs again, to seize on the moment and have the STATE take control of housing. To set incentives, agendas and to create a frame work, where housing is affordable, is state supported, is managed, is a prime goal for government, not where we now have Housing NZ being perverted as some “agency” or “corporating” to sell some homes and lands for huge profits, to evict tenants, to let developers rake in millions, to force HNZ tenants into chicken cage size boxed homes, and to betray the social contract that existed for decades.

      NZ is not the country I once came to. It has been alienated, prostituted, betrayed and let down, and the people here have not even any slight idea anymore what communal spirit and belonging may mean.

      It is all about division, self serving interests, and the government of the day wants to enforce this. Sadly most are too shell shocked, blinkered, afraid, manipulated, scared and only driven to look after thier own little turf. It is a divided, selfish, hatred driven population, that in large is the result of hatred driven policies of over 3 decades now. I wish I had never come back to this place, as it is no better than the worst places in Europe or elsewhere now. Sorry, that is how I feel, and I have lived here over 20 years.

  18. RedBaronCV 18

    Along with our medical subsidies being harvested by off shore owners and probaly the worst of the lot our elder care subsidies. The payment per hour is quite reasonable but it doesn’t trickle down to the coal face and these care firms also harvest the capital value of the older person’s house as they go into a retirement village. Look how well those companies are doing.
    Charities and co-ops have been virtually chased out of this sector.

  19. xtasy 19

    I do not really care what others here say and think! If a “foreign” investor, not a permanent resident, wants to invest in real estate here, she or he must be forced to pay a certain deposit to the government, an investment levy of sorts, to fund other social housing within NZ. If that is not complied with, NO permanent residency, NO special treatment, NO tax benefits and whatever corrupt means of attracting migrants that only “offer” a pocket full of money, that they can and will withdraw at any time they see fit.

    NZ has become a PROSTITUTE country, especially since Roger Douglas took charge of economics and that side of government. It is a slut country, where you get PR if you have a nice pocket of dough, or a large cheque book. This is why we have over 10 per cent of farmland sold off over recent years (Brendan Horan was onto it in Question Time), and that is why well over 10 per cent (this survey is underestimating the true effects) of residential real estate goes into foreign hands.

    I have met some of these Chinese buyers that are presently very active on the market here. They just want to have a safe haven, no matter where, be this here, in Australia, Canada, the US or other countries, as they do not trust the long term security in their own country.

    While some of them come with genuine and good intentions, are happy to invest, we have many that are just using NZ for their own ends and means. NZ will never survive as a Noah’s Arch anyway, as the world is being ruined by capitalism, pollution, wars, exploitation, hatred, over grazing, over population, over farming, over fishing and so forth, it will NOT survive under the present state of affairs.

    NZers have to accept that helping others must mean helping them to manage in their own countries, and only teaching to fish, rather than fish for them, will be a solution.

    We are all screwed anyway, as it looks, and as long as we have present government, we are doomed to dig a deep grave that we can all rest in together soon. I have almost NO hope anymore for NZ to get things right. It is SCREWED!

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Swiss tax agreement tightens net
    Opportunities to dodge tax are shrinking with the completion of a new tax agreement with Switzerland, Revenue Minister Stuart Nash announced today. Mr Nash and the Swiss Ambassador David Vogelsanger have today signed documents to update the double tax agreement (DTA). The previous DTA was signed in 1980. “Double tax ...
    2 weeks ago