Are you saving to buy a house?

Written By: - Date published: 7:22 am, March 13th, 2015 - 164 comments
Categories: class war, housing - Tags: , , ,

Are you saving to a buy house?

Are you saving more than $1000 a week?

If not, you are going backwards:

House asking prices going up $1000 every week

Heightened confidence in the property market continues to raise people’s expectations about what they might get for their house, according to Trade Me Property. The website’s property price index, which tracks the asking prices of new residential property listings, shows the national average asking price jumped to $505,350 in the three months to February, up 12.3 per cent on the same period a year ago. “In other words, asking prices have gone up more than $1000 every week across the country over the past year,” said Nigel Jeffries, Trade Me’s head of property.

Don’t worry, there’s always renting:

Big rent rises ‘grim for tenants’

Auckland leads the way with median figure of $480 a week, up 6.7 per cent.

National rents have risen 9 per cent in the past 12 months, the biggest increase recorded in five years and “grim news for tenants”. Nigel Jeffries, head of Trade Me Property, has just released the data for the year to January showing the median weekly rent is $420. “The 9 per cent year-on-year increase in January is the largest single-month rise we’ve recorded over the past five years. “Median weekly rents clicked up $20 per week between December and January to a record high of $420 per week. That’s grim news for tenants,” Mr Jeffries said.

This can’t go on. It really, really can’t.

164 comments on “Are you saving to buy a house? ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. DH 1
    13 March 2015 at 8:09 am

    “This can’t go on. It really, really can’t.”

    Sure it can. NZ is just catching up to the likes of Britain, Australia, Korea and others who had, and still have, the same massive housing inflation and for years longer than us.

    Auckland is fucked for the poor. The land has run out. It needs high density apartments, lots of them, to house the growing population and the greedies won’t allow it to happen.

    The Govt could, of course, cut back on immigration but since that contributes to the illusion of economic growth they’re not going to do that either.

    I think one of the most insulting aspects of this housing inflation is Aucklanders whining about their rates increasing.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.1
      13 March 2015 at 9:45 am

      +1

    • HumPrac 1.2
      13 March 2015 at 8:54 pm

      +1

    • Once was Tim 1.3
      13 March 2015 at 11:01 pm

      “I think one of the most insulting aspects of this housing inflation is Aucklanders whining about their rates increasing.”
      And watch them whine like constipated weeners when the bubble finally bursts (those that have purchased for ‘investment’ purposes that is)

  2. Puckish Rogue 2
    13 March 2015 at 8:12 am

    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2015/03/regional_gdp_growth.html

    In order of best to least best:

    1.Southland 11.0%
    2.Canterbury 10.6%
    3.Marlborough 10.3%
    4.Waikato 10.1%
    5.West Coast 7.8%
    6.Tasman/Nelson 7.8%
    7.Northland 7.7%
    8.Taranaki 7.2%
    9.Hawke’s Bay 6.4%
    10.Otago 6.3%
    11.Gisborne 5.9%
    12.Manawtau-Wanganui 5.6%
    13.Bay of Plenty 5.4%
    14.Auckland 5.1%
    15.Wellington 4.4%

    So move to a cheaper area then

    • miravox 2.1
      13 March 2015 at 8:20 am

      “So move to a cheaper area then”

      Because no-one on kiwiblog is going to go on about people moving to cheaper areas deliberately to avoid having to get jobs.

      • Puckish Rogue 2.1.1
        13 March 2015 at 8:27 am

        Plenty of areas outside Auckland/Wellington/Christchurch that’re experiencing good growth and the houses are cheaper as well

        • lprent 2.1.1.1
          13 March 2015 at 8:41 am

          Problem for my kinds of jobs is that there are virtually none of them in those areas. Many other people have the same issues in their various areas of expertise.

          There is a reason that people seeking skilled and unskilled jobs flock towards the areas where housing prices are higher. That is where the work (especially interesting work) is.

          If I want a service, teaching or extractive industry job, then I’d certainly head out of Auckland. Since I don’t, then I’d like John Key to get off his lazy arse and to help the market provide housing where it is needed rather than wasting efforts on bridges that have little or no economic benefit.

          Frankly if a single days overflow of people seeking jobs from Auckland / Wellington / Christchurch overflowed into the rest of NZ, it would suck up every other available job in NZ for a year or two. The scale is completely different You’re aware of this. So why bother with the dumbarse observation?

          • Puckish Rogue 2.1.1.1.1
            13 March 2015 at 9:18 am

            You can either move for a better life or stay where you are and bitch and moan about your circumstances, no surprise what your option is

            • Tom Jackson 2.1.1.1.1.1
              13 March 2015 at 9:52 am

              You didn’t address his argument, which shows that you have nothing.

              • Puckish Rogue …
                13 March 2015 at 10:10 am

                When the arguement essentially boils down to: National bad its quite frankly not much of an arguement and not worth any effort

                • felix …
                  13 March 2015 at 10:43 am

                  Pfft your argument boils down to choosing either a house or a job.

                  Greedy peasants think they deserve both.

                • Tom Jackson …
                  13 March 2015 at 11:29 am

                  No. That wasn’t his argument. Do you have trouble reading?

                  • locus …
                    14 March 2015 at 7:31 am

                    “You can either move for a better life or stay where you are and bitch and moan about your circumstances”

                    Essentially pukish’s response to reason is unreason: go where there’s cheap housing but no job “for a better life”

            • lprent 2.1.1.1.1.2
              13 March 2015 at 11:23 am

              Or we can fix the damn problem rather than pissing about with something that doesn’t work.

              But lets take your “better life”. I program computers for export. My quality of life is in a large part based on the 40-50 hours I spend at work each week. It is the largest part of my life and one that I enjoy a lot…

              So lets look at the top of your list At 11% economic growth.

              The population of Southland was estimated in the 2013 census as :-

              93,339 people usually live in Southland Region. This is an increase of 2,463 people, or 2.7 percent, since the 2006 Census.
              Its population ranks 11th in size out of the 16 regions in New Zealand.
              Southland Region has 2.2 percent of New Zealand’s population.

              Now look at Auckland at 5.1% growth

              1,415,550 people usually live in Auckland Region. This is an increase of 110,589 people, or 8.5 percent, since the 2006 Census.
              Its population ranks 1st in size out of the 16 regions in New Zealand.
              Auckland Region has 33.4 percent of New Zealand’s population.

              In other words, the population increase between censuses in Auckland was more than the population of high growth Southland.

              You’d have to be nuts moving to Southland and then job hunting. For me trying to find a programming job exporting software and hardware to the rest of the world in Invercargill would be virtually impossible. Trying to export without an international airport?

              I’d point out that my partner Lyn is from Southland and is up in Auckland because in her fields of work, the same thing applies. In all likelihood I’ll eventually do what my parents did. When they finished working they moved to Rotorua to retire.

              Virtually every region in NZ apart from Auckland / Wellington / Christchurch suffers from the same issues. Great places to raise cows, sheep, and jetskis. Not great when it comes to finding interesting commercial work if you aren’t interested in those things.

              As for doing something about it? Why do you think I run this blog dipshit? It is about helping to fix problems

              But hey, keep up with your stupidity about what needs to be fixed and how to fix it. By the sounds of it, it is to be a layabout. It is a great example to us all.

            • DoublePlusGood 2.1.1.1.1.3
              13 March 2015 at 11:32 am

              Or, you know, the government actually could do its job and work with the council to start fixing the issue.

          • NZJon 2.1.1.1.2
            13 March 2015 at 9:32 am

            I hear you, Lynn. That’s why I believe investment should go on things that allow interesting and well paid jobs to move out to the regions. Roading isn’t going to do that, but investment in things such as, oh, I don’t know, UFB to the last 25% of the nation. What’s stopping me–a software engineer–from working from home in a corner of paradise outside of the main centres, except a crappy old ADSL internet connection?

            • lprent 2.1.1.1.2.1
              13 March 2015 at 12:18 pm

              That was what I used to think as well (and why I used to have some property in Glenorchy a few decades ago).

              However what I have found is that very few of my jobs in the last decade have been pure software. Once you are out of local corporates, at least two thirds of the jobs tend to be hooked to hardware as firmware or code talking to firmware. I tend to work in cross-functional teams with EEs and others a lot more than I did when I was writing pure software remotely on ADSL (which I did for 8 years).

              Working without a nearby international airport these days for an tech exporter must be a hellish pain. The number of times I’ve had to get gear in or out in a hurry is pretty high. I haven’t done it myself in the last few decades, but the numbers of bodies that have had to go somewhere is much the same (and I’m about to start on that again as well).

              I suspect that the days of the lone programmer or artisan internationally are pretty limited except for specialist contractors and craftspeople.

              Somewhere over the last decade, I think that the economic arguments for concentrated larger cities and innovation flipped back over again to Full ON. And that is ignoring the other arguments for them.

              • Paul Campbell …
                13 March 2015 at 5:17 pm

                Well I work remotely in Dunedin (from California) I’ve done it for a decade for various companies, I get paid well, I’m an exporter, just like the farmers, but with far less pooh runoff from my property. I know a couple of dozen others in Dunedin who work remotely in the same way. I’ve created 1 new local job (one guy locally has created 6 or so) by hiring people locally. I bet there are a lot more people doing exactly this than you think.

                I still don’t have fibre in my neighbourhood though, neither do most of the people I know in Dunedin who work remotely, Chorus won’t even put you through if you call up and ask to talk to the person in charge of fibre installs, no we don’t talk to mere mortals, you’re not our customers, you’re what we sell

                Oh, and yes I hate Auckland airport with a passion, what other 3rd world country’s primary airport in this modern age still has an international terminal a kilometre away from the domestic one? – and the forced march through Duty Free – most tourist’s last NZ experience really is “Exit through the Gift Shop” – perfume makes me irritates my eyes, I avoid ground floor at Farmers and the like, end up in tears, in Auckland I arrive in immigration in tears – you can ask them for a way past the Duty Free chemical fog but they wont let you, and it’s too far to hold your breath, one of these days I’m going to pass out into a huge gin display

                A small correction, if you’re savin for a house you’re saving for a downpayment, if the house is going up $1000 a week the downpayment is only going up $200 a week, it’s still insane – it’s likely to mean my kids and my grandkids will end up in some other country.

                • Lanthanide …
                  13 March 2015 at 10:14 pm

                  Presumably if you’re working for a company in California, you’re an American citizen, which instantly puts you in a completely different class of people from what Lynn is talking about.

                  I think his guestimate that 2/3rds of software work in NZ is firmware, or very close to it, is probably right. Those sorts of jobs just aren’t really relocatable.

                  We don’t really have a plethora of large software services companies (I guess Xero is probably it) where working remotely is feasible.

                  If you’re an expat from another country, where you secured such a job and moved to NZ, then you’re really not in the same class as the rest of us. I couldn’t get a job for a US company working remotely in NZ even if I was qualified, because I don’t have a greencard, and since I haven’t lived in the US the opportunity simply wouldn’t present itself.

                  • Paul Campbell …
                    14 March 2015 at 10:15 am

                    No I’m kiwi though I did live in Silicon valley during my OE brought the kids back here to grow up. I’d guess half the people working like me in Dunedin brought jobs back with them the other half were hired by friends or found the jobs themselves. I don’t work for the employer I worked for when I moved back ten years ago.

                    I write core for embedded systems, mostly for consumer equipment as close to ‘firmware’ as you can get. I also design hardware and built chips for a decade.

                    Best way I know to get a job in a ‘US’ company is to work on open source, make a name for yourself and join a virtual team – doesn’t have to be a US company though, one neighbour works the night shift at the GLC, I know someone else who supports a research team at Cambridge both came back for their kid’s

            • BevanJS 2.1.1.1.2.2
              14 March 2015 at 11:52 am

              I believe, and have for a long time, that its poor/blinkered middle management not broadband performance that holds essentially keyboard operators to the big centres…. and I’ve been very lucky.

        • miravox 2.1.1.2
          13 March 2015 at 9:30 am

          As far as I can see the country would rather import ‘resources’ to reduce the cost of the labour ‘market’ instead of ensuring local skills meet local needs.

          Plus what weka said @2.3

        • BassGuy 2.1.1.3
          13 March 2015 at 10:05 am

          You mean like Otago? Because a friend of mine in Otago recently (within the month) signed up with WINZ and, at her first meeting, her case manager told her that they have 4000 people on their books in Dunedin, and only 15 jobs.

          So yeah, pack up and move to sunny Dunedin and enjoy the good life of slightly lower rents and little hope of a job.

    • Sacha 2.2
      13 March 2015 at 8:26 am

      Hark at all the recently-intensified dairying regions towards the top of the list. Shame there aren’t many good jobs in it.

    • weka 2.3
      13 March 2015 at 8:44 am

      “So move to a cheaper area then”

      The right wing solution is to destroy communities and have people shift away from their support systems.

      The expectation is to treat everyone as if they are fit young men with no responsibilities who can follow the job market around the country, or to treat everyone as if they’re very wealthy and can pay for the moving costs and fly home to see the folks when they want to.

      • Puckish Rogue 2.3.1
        13 March 2015 at 9:01 am

        Ahh bollix, people have moved around for well centuries for a better life so why is it different now

        • weka 2.3.1.1
          13 March 2015 at 9:20 am

          It’s not different. People being forced economic migrants has always destroyed communities. The people that move because they want to is a much smaller number and communities can manage that. Taking large numbers of the population and moving them around continuously means communities are less functional and resilient. But hey, what’s that matter when a select few can make a killing on the property market. Having less functional communities serves the neoliberal right wing agenda just fine, that’s why they do it.

        • Naturesong 2.3.1.2
          13 March 2015 at 11:02 am

          It’s not.

          Ever read Steinbeck?

          Or, since it’s pretty clear you struggle with both reading and comprehension, heres a song for you: Ballad of Tom Joad

        • Tom Jackson 2.3.1.3
          13 March 2015 at 11:34 am

          Because the market system doesn’t capture the costs of getting people to move around like that. For example, if you constantly shift your children’s school, it will likely have a negative effect on their scholastic achievement and socialisation. The cost in future lost productivity and future social cost isn’t borne by the people creating the problem. It’s the old “privatise the profits, externalise the costs” move.

          • Capn Insano 2.3.1.3.1
            13 March 2015 at 12:31 pm

            Agreed. Personally I shudder at moving out of Auckland for a couple of reasons, the first of which being uncertainty at finding another job elsewhere that suits my skills/experience and not copping a decrease in income. The other main one is, of course, moving away from family and friends, particularly as I have lived in the area my whole life. I am loath to move in the immediate future, why should I feel forced out because this fucking incompetent/corrupt government can’t or won’t pull finger and do something to ease these ridiculous housing prices [in part due to arsehole investors]?

      • Molly 2.3.2
        13 March 2015 at 9:22 am

        +100

      • Rosie 2.3.3
        13 March 2015 at 9:31 am

        +1 weka.

        There’s nothing worse than the smug and righteous “so move to a cheaper area then” response to a housing crisis.

        On a moral and human level,people have families, schools, jobs, friends, connections, networks and responsibilities in their own communities. It’s their world and that’s where they belong. The housing crisis is not of their making and they should not have to pay the price for the market’s folly.

        On a practical level, Lynn is exactly right at 2.1.1.1 Pukish brogue chooses to ignore those facts and go with the kick ’em when they’re down routine instead, quite typical of the RWNJ world view.

        • Puckish Rogue 2.3.3.1
          13 March 2015 at 9:43 am

          -100

          People have always moved for a better life, people will always move for a better life.

          The people of NZ understand this but, once again, the left fail to see this

          • Draco T Bastard 2.3.3.1.1
            13 March 2015 at 9:50 am

            There’s a difference between moving for a better life and moving because you’ve been kicked down the road.

          • weka 2.3.3.1.2
            13 March 2015 at 9:53 am

            ok, we can all see now that you have no intention of responding to actual points that people raise, so you get the Stuck Record Award of the morning.

          • Rosie 2.3.3.1.3
            13 March 2015 at 10:06 am

            Geez Puke. Try telling those who can’t afford to live to move somewhere else and see how you get on. It’s not the fucking 1970’s any more. There’s not jobs galore in the regions, and certainly not for those whose jobs are tied up in city based businesses. Read Lynn’s comment again.

            It’s not a thing of “being on the left”. Housing inaffordability affects those of all political colours an non colours. All you do is come here to shit stir and try to turn something that is painful and real for far too many people into a pathetic opportunity to have a dig.

            You are Fisiani are using the same lame tactics.

          • freedom 2.3.3.1.4
            13 March 2015 at 10:09 am

            “People have always moved for a better life” Ahhh the better life – pfft!

            You are assuming these people are not living the exact lives they want to be living, have worked hard to be living and might want to continue living them.

            They might be part of a fullsome and lively community, they might know their neighbours and even like them. They might have jobs they work hard in, jobs they trained for, jobs they enjoy even. Jobs that did satisfy their needs before the greed of property investors put price above value and profit above common sense. Eventually forcing tens of thousands to face a weekly threat of not making the rent or the mortgage or the debt interest on the easy-loan they got to cover last week’s payment.

            These people you think should move for a better life might be absolutely happy functioning purposeful and necessary in the community they currently live. They probably have connections and responsibilities to family, neighbours, schools, sports teams and all the other people and social functions that make a community. They might just feel the only problem was not being able to afford to have a roof over their heads for much longer.

            I know, I know, shouting into a gale only makes one’s throat hoarse

          • Tom Jackson 2.3.3.1.5
            13 March 2015 at 11:35 am

            Enclosure acts…

          • DoublePlusGood 2.3.3.1.6
            13 March 2015 at 12:50 pm

            I could move somewhere there are jobs, and never be able to buy a house due to house prices. Or, I could move somewhere there are no jobs, and as a result, never be able to buy a house.
            Great choices.

            • Puckish Rogue 2.3.3.1.6.1
              13 March 2015 at 2:10 pm

              and yet people are somehow still buying houses, maybe if you look in the mirror you’ll work out the problem

              • weka …
                13 March 2015 at 2:15 pm

                I guess we don’t need to feed this trole anymore.

                • Puckish Rogue …
                  13 March 2015 at 2:35 pm

                  I just get a bit sick of people on here always blaming the gummint (sorry the tory gummint) for everything

                  We’re all lucky and fortunate to be born in one of the best countries in the world, where irrespctive of race, gender or sexuality you can achieve to the highest levels, with a benefit one of the highest per capita in the world

                  Yet its not enough and it’ll never be enough as long people always look to outside forces to get ahead rather then look at themselves

                  Fact is this: if you can’t make it in NZ then you can’t make it anywhere

                  • weka …
                    13 March 2015 at 2:47 pm

                    Ah, the trole has some selfish right wing political convictions, what a surprise.

                    You’ve just posted multiple times in this thread in ways that completely ignore any kind of meaningful debate, and now you want to say that people are completely responsible for their own situations despite the evidence. You can either start engaging in the conversation meaningfully, or you can be a trole. You can’t be both.

                  • miravox …
                    13 March 2015 at 4:39 pm

                    “Fact is this: if you can’t make it in NZ then you can’t make it anywhere”

                    Tell that to this person

                    • Murray Rawshark …
                      14 March 2015 at 12:44 am

                      I can see why FJK always wears suits. In a t-shirt he just looks terrible. He really needs all that shoulder padding.

                  • Murray Rawshark …
                    14 March 2015 at 12:45 am

                    “Fact is this: if you can’t make it in NZ then you can’t make it anywhere”

                    Bullshit. I couldn’t get a job in my field in NZ. I had offers from all over the world. I think what you mean is that Tories who depend on having their snouts in the state trough can’t make it anywhere else.

          • HumPrac 2.3.3.1.7
            13 March 2015 at 9:11 pm

            People are trapped because of your ignorance, so you owe ALL those people. End of story.

    • mac1 2.4
      13 March 2015 at 9:45 am

      So move to Marlborough with a nominal 10% growth?

      Marlborough has the lowest, or second lowest, wage economy in the country.

      The growth in the local economy is driven by third world economic practice where 80% of the vineyards are owned outside the province or the country, and consequently the profits are also alienated outside the province.

      Marlborough is left with the low wage jobs which include caring for the higher than average senior community, which is larger than the under 15s, and growing.

      You can get a cheap house in Seddon, but you’ve got major drinking water problems there.

      Government business has been progressively withdrawn to larger towns like Nelson and the same with businesses. Those businesses being built tend to be owned outside the province and again the profits go elsewhere, leaving the income of the low paid jobs to the province.

      Unemployment is at the national average. Marlborough kept its full employment much later than most with the down turn.

      Like small towns everywhere, the young leave for jobs and further education elsewhere. Yes, the houses are cheaper in Marlborough but my neighbour has not sold a three bed-room house in months, at near the $280,000 mark.

    • Macro 2.5
      13 March 2015 at 4:25 pm

      Yeah! – there’s plenty of cheap housing in the Coromandel! Oh Bugger! They just closed another saw mill putting 100 guys out on the streets. But they want to start a mine! Oh Bugger! its just up stream from Paeroa’s water supply – and in a main tourist area. Plenty of Dairying jobs on the plains! Oh Bugger! Climate change has brought 5 droughts in the last 10 years. Cokies are selling up.
      Gezz you lot are f**king hopeless.

    • infused 2.6
      13 March 2015 at 7:20 pm

      Pretty much. It’s not a $1000 a week in most places. That’s averaged out with Auckland included.

      Nice bait.

      Move to the Hutt in Wellington. Lots of 300k homes and a massive IT shortage atm.

  3. Sacha 3
    13 March 2015 at 8:22 am

    The supply of money is the underlying problem (too much), not the supply of land (too little) as the current crop of numpties would have us believe.

    And the way our housing market is regulated encourages huge sprawling single-level dwellings ahead of more intense forms that create critical mass of residents for other services and amenities to cluster around. Christchurch was a classic opportunity to change this, and look what they’ve done instead. Similarly, creating a single Auckland council and plan was a time for change, and it has been watered down by whinging seaside suburbanites who want their villages and commutes preserved in amber forever.

    • Molly 3.1
      13 March 2015 at 9:26 am

      “creating a single Auckland council and plan”

      Agree, an opportunity missed. The bullying of National led to the provision for SHA’s which completely override the public’s support for a denser, well designed city.

      The complete separation of Auckland Transport from Auckland Council, also makes planning less effective. How people live, and how people move is integrated. Planning for transport that is not effectively integrated with planning for buildings, services, recreational and community spaces is going to continue to produce lacklustre results.

    • Macro 3.2
      13 March 2015 at 4:35 pm

      The supply of money has been given by default to the banks – it is in the Bankers interest to continue to increase the supply of money ad infinitum giving them more and more money. This has to be controlled. Banks only given the ability to lend over and above their deposits on productive enterprises. They will squeal like pigs – but it is the only way to get our country and our wealth back.

  4. les 4
    13 March 2015 at 8:26 am

    Auction on Wednesday ,Onehunga properties …5 sold under the hammer-4 to overseas buyers.

  5. fisiani 5
    13 March 2015 at 9:13 am

    You can buy a lovely 3 bedroom home in Timaru for $278,000.
    Why the obsession with Auckland?
    Think supply and demand.
    Move South.
    Life exists below the Bombay Hills.

    • les 5.1
      13 March 2015 at 9:16 am

      have the ones adjacent to your house ..sold yet?

    • Draco T Bastard 5.2
      13 March 2015 at 9:55 am

      We are thinking supply/demand – of jobs and needed skills. You seem to fail to understand these necessities.

    • Lanthanide 5.3
      13 March 2015 at 10:00 am

      Who cares if you have family, community connections, or god forbid just like the weather and the multiculturalism of Auckland.

    • Skinny 5.4
      13 March 2015 at 10:09 am

      Move to Timaru, your one disturbed individual fisiani. Why do you think someone wrote a hit song called Bye Bye Timaru.

    • DoublePlusGood 5.5
      13 March 2015 at 11:35 am

      Ah yes, so many jobs paying a decent wage in that noted metropolis of Timaru.

  6. One Anonymous Bloke 6
    13 March 2015 at 9:17 am

    Shorter PR and Fisiani: “Let them eat cake”.

    • fisiani 6.1
      13 March 2015 at 9:23 am

      Idiot! They have already been eating cake. I’m saying “Let them eat bread.”
      What’s wrong with Timaru?

      • Molly 6.1.1
        13 March 2015 at 9:36 am

        Think Fisiani.

        Why do you think that people want to own a house?

        Is it to strengthen ties to community?
        Is it to give some sense of stability to themselves, and their families?
        Is it to provide them with a physical reminder of the input of their labour and a guarantee that despite anything else they will have a home to live in – and offer as save haven for those they love that are in need?

        You seem to think that owning any home, any where is an answer. But you miss the point.

        For many people, owning a home provides the stability that working under a 90 day job offer does not. It allows them to invest time and energy into a community (and here is the kicker for you) with no financial returns, but with multiple fold benefits for themselves and their communities. Volunteer sports coaches, community groups, conservation projects. All these benefits accrue to the wider population.

        And let me suggest something that may not occur you, but seems apparent by the most casual observation. Many of those doing the hard graft are often those who are just making ends meet.

        If, as you suggest we leave cities to only those who can afford them (financial apartheid is the phrase that springs to mind), these enclaves will end up being bereft of meaningful connections.

        • fisiani 6.1.1.1
          13 March 2015 at 3:28 pm

          For the life of me I cannot understand why that homily precludes Timaru or Invercargill or Masterton to name but just a few places where you do not have to spend a fortune on a mortgage and so an average wage can provide a 3 bedroom house with a garden. These regional towns are not bereft of community, sport coaches and community groups. You need to get out more.

          http://www.realestate.co.nz/residential/all/canterbury/timaru
          http://www.realestate.co.nz/residential/all/southland/invercargill-city
          http://www.realestate.co.nz/residential/all/wairarapa/masterton/masterton

          If you buy a house in any of these places for $250,000 your fortnightly mortgage costs are just $475 which is a lot cheaper than renting in Auckland.
          It’s not Go West young man
          It’s Go South for a real life.

          • DoublePlusGood 6.1.1.1.1
            13 March 2015 at 3:57 pm

            To be fair, Go West to the west coast likely results in even lower prices than that.

          • Molly 6.1.1.1.2
            13 March 2015 at 4:44 pm

            Real lives already have connections with family, friends and communities and land. You seem to believe that because they are interchangeable for you, they are so for everyone. That is not true.

            You may have to watch Peter Carena in This Way of Life to get some exposure to other value systems. When asked what he does for a living: “I live for a living”.

            Purchasing a house is not always about ownership and capital gains. Sometimes it is about belonging to a place, and contributing.

            • fisiani 6.1.1.1.2.1
              13 March 2015 at 5:00 pm

              My God. Just because your parents brought you up in Mangere you want to sentence people to have to live there generation after generation. Every person in New Zealand is an immigrant or the descendent of an immigrant. That’s a fact. Every immigrant left a community and found another one. The petty insular mindset does not fit with the immigrant NZ mentality.

              • Molly …
                13 March 2015 at 6:30 pm

                No, absolutely not.

                But what you suggest only works for a percentage of the population. Your solution does not take into account other value systems. So it is not really a broad solution for the problem of housing affordability – it is an option that comes with attendant costs and considerations.

      • One Anonymous Bloke 6.1.2
        13 March 2015 at 12:43 pm

        In the event that this 18thC attitude leads to an 18thC response, I’m sure I might be motivated to register some sort of mild disapproval, perhaps a raised eyebrow.

    • Puckish Rogue 6.2
      13 March 2015 at 9:33 am

      Actually yes I am, I consider Christchurch a better place to live then Auckland. Jobs are readily available, houses are cheaper and you get to live in the South Island, so yeah if you live in Auckland you really should consider moving south

      • DoublePlusGood 6.2.1
        13 March 2015 at 11:37 am

        You are aware that there is a massive housing crisis in Christchurch right? In your insulated position of privilege and wealth you may not have realised that there were in fact earthquakes in Christchurch that have had significant effects on housing availability.

  7. Draco T Bastard 7
    13 March 2015 at 9:45 am

    This can’t go on. It really, really can’t.

    This type of rort is what you get when society becomes a rentier society rather than a society that produces stuff. A few people living it up on rising asset prices as the rest get deeper into debt/poverty.

    As you say, it cannot go on as the needs of our society are left unmet due to the greed, as represented by National, of the few.

  8. Colonial Rawshark 8
    13 March 2015 at 11:15 am

    NZ has lost the ability to forward plan, and those with significant property portfolios love it because they are getting shitloads of capital appreciation every single month for no work. Five properties $5K tax free capital gains a week. Not a bad racket.

    And we can’t squeeze 1/3 the population of NZ into 0.3% of the land area, let it worsen, and then complain about the obvious consequences if we let it continue.

    If the Opposition are serious about halting home price rises, they have to accept their own property portfolios will take a hit, they have to commit a huge amount of money to building social housing, the banks ability to lend on property in hot spots has to be completely chopped back, and Auckland population growth has to be severely reigned in.

    Which political party is willing to do any of those things.

  9. Tom Jackson 9
    13 March 2015 at 11:40 am

    I pay much less than the median rent for my mortgage, and my house is nicer than most rentals. Of course people would prefer to buy if they weren’t priced out of the market by foreigners and the local acolytes of the pig party.

    • Stephanie Rodgers 9.1
      13 March 2015 at 10:15 pm

      I was staggered when we bought our home and worked out how much less we were paying in minimum mortgage payments than we’d been paying in rent – and for a much nicer place! Rental properties are such a rort.

  10. Chooky 10
    13 March 2015 at 11:42 am

    NZ youth should be in revolt over this ….and organising against John Key Nactional for allowing this to happen….NZ youth are being betrayed by the Nact govt policies

  11. Naturesong 11
    13 March 2015 at 11:43 am

    I don’t normally criticise the case that posters make, preferring to discuss the content of the post, or other peripheral subjects that get thrown up in the conversation.

    But, in this case, I think the augment is disingenuous. Further, it’s not necessary at all, the situation is fucked, and you are not doing anyone, least of all yourself, any favours by exaggerating it.

    Let me explain.
    You don’t need to save an additional $1000 per week to keep up, you only need to save an additional 20% per week (on top of your normal saving for a house) as you can borrow the rest (assuming you earn enough to service the loan that is).

    So, if you need $505,350 for a house today:
    20% deposit; $101,070
    Saving over 5 years = $20,214 per year, or $388.72 pw
    However, to keep up with hose inflation, an additional 20% of the rate at which house prices are inflating is required.
    So, $388.72 + $200 = $588.72 per week.
    Which comes to $30,613.44 per annum

    Or, to put it another way, in order to buy an average house in five years, a person or couple needs to save, in cash (after rent and living expenses et al), the same amount as the medium income in New Zealand.
    This is an untenable situation for the citizens of New Zealand, there is no need to embellish or exaggerate.

    … and then there is the rate at which wages would need to rise in order to keep up.

    • lprent 11.1
      13 March 2015 at 12:26 pm

      That is worth a post on its own.

      I was looking at those numbers and thinking that I’d be hard pushed to save $20k pa for 5 years on my largish salary. I could do it if I forgot about moving jobs and figured out some way to fix a rent….

      • Naturesong 11.1.1
        13 March 2015 at 12:39 pm

        I did it when I bought my house…. BUT

        I used to (I’m back at school this year) earn between 85 and 110k per year
        And, I lived rent free for 2 years looking after a relative’s house when we could no longer support her in her own home and she had to move to a nursing home.
        And then I lived in a one bedroom bedsit at the outskirts of Auckland for another 2 years.
        And, family lent me an extra 10k at the end to get me over the top (a house that was perfect for my needs came up earlier than expected).

        Also, I’m white, middle class, educated and have good support systems

        So, I was determined, disciplined and worked hard*, and had a great deal of help and support, as well as privilege.

        • Btw, this is where rwnj arguments normally end – ”I worked hard, I succeeded, why can’t everybody else” … be middle class and white?

        edit: I bought my house 2 years ago. The price at that time was about halfway between the average price of an Auckland house and the average price of a New Zealand house – or in the bottom half of the Auckland market.

      • Lanthanide 11.1.2
        13 March 2015 at 12:48 pm

        I’m currently saving about $35-40k a year. Not including kiwisaver. I’ve also paid off my SL.

        • Naturesong 11.1.2.1
          13 March 2015 at 12:54 pm

          You’re able to save an amount of money each year that is greater than the amount of money that more than half of the population of New Zealand has to survive on each year.

          Nice work if you can get it.

          • Lanthanide 11.1.2.1.1
            13 March 2015 at 1:07 pm

            Yes. I also already own a house and the rental return is just break-even on it. I myself am renting.

            • Naturesong 11.1.2.1.1.1
              13 March 2015 at 1:26 pm

              Yes, there is a clear tax incentive to buy houses specifically to rent to other people.
              It’s just another one of the things that helps drive price increases.
              I’m in favour of removing the ability for landlords to claim interest as an expense.

              I’ve thought about it myself, especially this year where I’m relying on savings and a bit of ad-hoc packaging work.
              But I bought the house to be my home, I’ve finally got space for my tools!! It’s walking distance to the train station!

              Question, if you were no longer able to claim loan interest and house maintenance as expenses would you live in your house rather than rent?

              • Lanthanide …
                13 March 2015 at 1:55 pm

                I didn’t buy my house to rent it out, I bought it to live in but my circumstances have changed to the point that renting it out makes more financial sense, and I’m not in a position to sell it right now.

                If it wasn’t possible to claim the mortgage interest as an expense against the income, so I was paying tax on the total rental income instead of just the (very slim) profit, then yes, I would be living in it rather than renting it out.

                But since the house has 3 living rooms and 5 bedrooms, when when I was (recently) living in it we only used 2 bedrooms and 1 living room, I think it is much better utilised by the family of 8 that are currently renting it.

              • mikesh …
                13 March 2015 at 3:46 pm

                A good case can be made for not allowing deductibility of interest as it is not actually a business expense. Interest may allow a landlord, or other business proprietor, to invest, but in no way does it contribute to the business operation itself.

                • Naturesong …
                  13 March 2015 at 3:49 pm

                  I think a similar case can be made against depreciation.

                  Both look to assess the cost of capital*.

                  edit: *that is my impression, I may well be on shakey ground here

              • Psycho Milt …
                13 March 2015 at 10:37 pm

                Yes, there is a clear tax incentive to buy houses specifically to rent to other people.

                Is there fucking what. We gave up and joined them over a year ago. If you already own a house, the banks will throw no-deposit loans at you for multiple additional houses, the tenants will pay the mortgages, your accountant will arrange tax refunds for whatever costs you actually suffer, and at the end of it you have multiple houses that you paid next to nothing for. By any standard, this is completely-fucking-nuts. Writing as someone who can expect to receive capital gain, it disappoints me that Labour lacked the bollocks to stick with a capital gains tax – the fact that lots of voters really like enriching themselves at the expense of the less fortunate doesn’t mean the government should indulge them.

                • Lanthanide …
                  13 March 2015 at 11:46 pm

                  Yes, if you have the financial means, it does seem very difficult to justify not joining in on this casino.

                  Although I am in a financial position to where I could go and buy 1 or 2 investment properties, it would result in me taking on much more risk than I’m comfortable with, and I have a generally pessimistic view for how the western world is going to look 3+ years from now due to peak oil.

                  My parents have been very conservative financially (bank term deposits only), and so when they’ve retired they won’t have to live solely off the pension, they aren’t going to be jet-setting it either.

                  • Colonial Rawshark …
                    14 March 2015 at 7:13 am

                    Hi Lanth, to be truly (financially) conservative in NZ you or your parents need to have at least part of your savings in (either individual or perhaps joint) residential investment property in a sound location. The reason being is that the banking system is going to undergo a massive amount of turmoil come GFC2, GFC3 etc. A bank deposit can be “haircut” or frozen at the stroke of a keyboard and when it happens there will be ***no warning*** (not unlike the Tequila Crisis or the recent Swiss Bank unpegging where just days before central bank officials were swearing that things were fine).

                    Banks can close for a week and be restructured, electronic credits can “vapourise” never to be seen again.

                    Having some of your assets in a property fully owned and freehold by yourselves, not the bank, which is of quality, well maintained, in a desirable location, hedges any future risk of a financial system, banking or currency collapse. And a property which has characteristics of resiliency for those future challenges you mention, is going to be particularly in demand in the future.

                    Even if the unit of account sometime in the distant future is no longer in NZD or USD, but in sheep and cows…

        • Puckish Rogue 11.1.2.2
          13 March 2015 at 2:31 pm

          Well done to you, I only make 43K a year before tax so good on you for doing well

          • Naturesong 11.1.2.2.1
            13 March 2015 at 3:53 pm

            Wow, so you are already earning an income that is far above the income of the majority of New Zealanders.

            Congrats to you, though it does surprise me that tr0lling online forums pays that well.

          • DoublePlusGood 11.1.2.2.2
            13 March 2015 at 4:10 pm

            ANZ’s mortgage calculator says they’d only be willing to lend you $282k on that income. Which suggests that if you own property, you either had help, or bought it some time ago before prices got ridiculous, or you saved over a very long period of time. None of those situations are useful to your average New Zealander looking for a house for their family right now.

        • lprent 11.1.2.3
          13 March 2015 at 4:55 pm

          I was contemplating it. A lot of the expense that I currently have is related to already owning a house.

          The bit of left-over debt from the difference between actual full costs (like moving) in the leaky building stuff and the settlement. I am killing that off at roughly 10-15k per year. I have 4K pa on body corporate. 1k pa for rates.

          On the other hand, we are paying well under a rental in this building on tbe mortgage – about 2/3rds.

          And I do have some moderately expensive habits, like computers and this site. And 8% kiwisaver.

          If I was renting, doing a minimal kiwisaver, and constraining some of my life choices (like changing jobs) then I suspect that I could easily do 20k. It’d be a push at 30k. It is pretty expensive on the rents.

          If Lyn and I both did it we’d save a lot more. On the other hand she wouldn’t be able to be a filmmaker. And if I’d done those things when I was younger, I wouldn’t be able to do what I do – some of the work risks I took were in retrospect kind of insane (but fulfilling)

    • r0b 11.2
      13 March 2015 at 12:46 pm

      It was a short informal post to highlight the increasing cost of houses and renting.

      You are right that you only need to save 20% of an extra 1K per week up front if you’re prepared to chuck the rest of it on a mortgage. But you’re still going to pay that extra plus interest via your mortgage.

      You’re going backwards ,fast, every week…

      • aerobubble 11.2.1
        13 March 2015 at 12:54 pm

        not if you become a property developer, just remember when they start selling tullips for a million and dont do it.

        • aerobubble 11.2.1.1
          13 March 2015 at 1:01 pm

          Seriously though. Just as a south island driver can help solve the foriegn driving problem by having a large flash arrow on their frontage of their car reminding everyone which side of their car its expected to pass.

          So renters can collectivize into a non-profit buy land build, buy homes share, and cut the middle men (keys people) out of the capital gain. Imagine having a regular car share, so as a collective you can move out further and use the cheaper housing to spring onto and then act as a base to buy and build closer in.
          When the asians retreat, or finall setup roots, the collective will be highly skilled operator ready to take profit.

      • Naturesong 11.2.2
        13 March 2015 at 1:10 pm

        Yup, I figured that due to the brevity of the post.

        I was moved to criticise your post because of what I saw recently at the pride parade (I was part of the audience via twitter and other media feeds, not in person).

        I saw an exaggeration* made by one of the main people involved (the time it took for Emmy to receive medical attention) in the fracas used to discredit their honesty, their character and the legitimacy of their protest.

        It made me want to cry.

        *not wanting to derail this thread, but my suspicion is that to the person at the edge of the fracas it really did seem like it took that long – adrenaline, shock, raised heart and blood pressure etc. That shit will really slow down your perception of time.

  12. Linda 12
    13 March 2015 at 2:56 pm

    It can only carry on as long as there is cheap credit to fuel and blow up the bubble
    Zerp interest rate policy in likes china Europe and the us have caused this
    Is it any wonder our reserve bank is starting to get really worried .Along with this massive misallocation of capital has a parrell increase in debt nz house hold debt is a basket case ,the social fall out of financalisation of housing. Has been far reaching
    And will only get worse ,when this bubble goes bang those of us who haven’t speculated or been reckless with excessive credit will feel the affects as well ,
    The soundness of the bank has become a threat to our savings.
    Younger people have had asperations and security of a home ownership trashed

    • Colonial Rawshark 12.1
      14 March 2015 at 7:21 am

      And now they are transitioning from ZIRP to NIRP, they are going to keep pretending and extending until the system implodes in a very nasty way. Some institutions are now able to be ***paid*** interest to borrow money.

      Note how we continue to tightly ration money to poor people in our society for reasons of superior morality and class control, whereas large investment banks can access their money for free (or with effective interest rates of less than 1%) from the international central banking system.

      • linda 12.1.1
        16 March 2015 at 7:34 pm

        whole system is rotten to the core ,don’t you just love the way they talk a bank is not bankrupt insolvent fuck or rooted its in resolution and when they steal your money its a hair cut nirp is steal your money as well

      • linda 12.1.2
        16 March 2015 at 7:53 pm

        rationing money you are actually rationing food,energy and services

  13. Mark Freeman 13
    13 March 2015 at 7:52 pm

    There are so many comments on this post that can be torn to shreds with a bit of history, logic and sunlight. It’s hardly surprising that many of you are too frightened to expose your lame arguments to rigorous intellectual debate on real blogs that encourage it. Hilarious.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 13.1
      13 March 2015 at 9:23 pm

      torn to shreds

      Unfortunately, you’re not up to the task, or you’d have done so.

    • Colonial Rawshark 13.2
      14 March 2015 at 7:22 am

      It’s hardly surprising that many of you are too frightened to expose your lame arguments to rigorous intellectual debate on real blogs that encourage it. Hilarious.

      If only you realised the delicious irony of your lame statement.

  14. Mark Freeman 14
    13 March 2015 at 9:06 pm

    “Community” for anyone born even close to the middle of last century easily and happily involves friends, family, colleagues, workmates, SM contacts etc from all over the world, let alone different towns in NZ. Why consign anyone to a place that is too difficult to survive with spurious excuses as to how difficult it is to move around? I call bullshit on the argument that lack of International Airport is any more than a small barrier to careers (or even jobs) in the field mentioned by LP as well. Give us an example.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 14.1
      13 March 2015 at 9:26 pm

      Who’s being “consigned”? While you’re on about “spurious excuses”, how many times did you shift home and school as a kid? If the answer to that question is “not many” then I call bullshit, on the grounds that you haven’t the first idea what you’re talking about.

      • weka 14.1.1
        13 March 2015 at 9:42 pm

        I’d also call bullshit on the idea that people from all over the world can’t form community in the way I was meaning. It’s not about where people come from, it’s about things like stability, institutional knowledge, connection to land and people, relationships etc. Any halfwit can see that knowing somewhere for a long time brings benefits that knowing somewhere for a short time doesn’t.

  15. Mark Freeman 15
    13 March 2015 at 9:45 pm

    Many times. Occasionally I tried to make that an excuse, but I’ll admit that I’ve had a couple of advantages that may have made things easier. That’s not the point of my comments – which is that the more you assert that most people are not capable of doing it successfully the less you empower them to create a more satisfying situation for their family. Next question…

  16. Mark Freeman 16
    13 March 2015 at 10:14 pm

    The benefits of a settled childhood could be debated in many ways. Married parents who care? Worked in some ways for me and I’d say a great majority of our society. Separated parents who care? Looks to be working really well for my daughters & many others, despite their wider families being spread throughout NZ/Aust. Humankind flourished by being mobile & adaptable, why diminish 21st Century flexible & obviously technologically adept people by pretending it isn’t so? Unless of course your agenda and 100 yr old (failed) ideology demands it….

    • Stephanie Rodgers 16.1
      13 March 2015 at 10:18 pm

      Please try to use the “reply” buttons properly, it makes the conversation much easier to follow. If you’re using the mobile version of the site which doesn’t have reply buttons, please indicate who you are talking to.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 16.2
      13 March 2015 at 10:23 pm

      “Debated” – more empty verbiage – it’s been quantified by people who have more to go on than anecdata, privilege, and witless fantasies about my “ideology”.

      The only “debate” you’re capable of is your boring biography.

    • weka 16.3
      13 March 2015 at 11:53 pm

      “Humankind flourished by being mobile & adaptable”

      For most of human history, humans have organised tribally and the tribe has moved, not the individual worker.

      Forcing people to leave behind their community for economic reasons is not the same as people who move out of choice. Then consider the differences between a woman with young children being forced to move for economic reasons and ending up with no social supports, and a young man with no responsibilities and few ties who is following a career path.

      “Looks to be working really well for my daughters & many others, despite their wider families being spread throughout NZ/Aust.”

      You appear to be missing the point, which is the wellbeing of the community not solely the individuals.

  17. Mark Freeman 17
    13 March 2015 at 11:03 pm

    OAB
    Do you have anything other than ad hom & abuse to contribute?
    This is the blog home of the so called intellectually superior left isn’t it? I’d love to see some evidence of that…
    Thanks Stephanie, I’m on mobile, point noted.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 17.1
      14 March 2015 at 12:11 am

      You don’t actually know what an ad hominem argument looks like, do you?

      I’m not discounting your drivel because you’re a boring hypocrite (“you are too frightened”), I’m discounting it because it’s empty verbiage – nothing but froth and anecdata.

      Have you made the slightest attempt to debate the issue? Nope, all you’ve done is share your dull life story and attack “the left”.

      The benefits of a settled childhood have been quantified. Your response? You haven’t got one.

  18. Mark Freeman 18
    14 March 2015 at 3:05 pm

    I suspect what your link shows is that feckless parents dragging unfortunate children from suburb to suburb as they trash houses and rip others off has a detrimental effect on the kids OAB. That’s not rocket science nor the fault of this Govt,as much as your hallowed troughers in Academia would try to convince the gullible in Society. Low wage people who despite outstanding economic conditions remain low wage are generally going to be far better off (if they want to buy a house) moving to one of the many regions in NZ where there is cheaper housing. There are jobs everywhere for those that want them. It borders on criminal for the Left to inflict ongoing poverty of ambition & (relative) lifestyle on families by pretending that they can’t successfully relocate.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 18.1
      14 March 2015 at 3:12 pm

      Ah, so now dislocation does have an effect. However, if you actually read the paper I cited (radical concept, I know, having to take time to learn something), you’d find that it…

      …uses in-depth interview data from a sample of families participating in an experimental housing relocation program, the Moving to Opportunity (MTO) Program, to examine the formation of social connections in the short-term after moving for young children and adolescents.

      Hallowed troughers eh, hypocrite. Your ‘suspicions’ are evidence of nothing except your bigotry.

      PS: your hate blinds you to the evidence, hatey boy.

      PPS: In your book of dogma, what’s the excuse for the fact that there are always more unemployed people under National? Is the National Party a feckless vandal factory?

    • Murray Rawshark 18.2
      14 March 2015 at 4:00 pm

      “I suspect what your link shows is that feckless parents dragging unfortunate children from suburb to suburb as they trash houses and rip others off has a detrimental effect on the kids”

      You could learn to read and actually find out. You ain’t nothing but a collection of prejudices emanating from a keyboard.

    • Paul 18.3
      14 March 2015 at 4:06 pm

      Heard of the word empathy?

  19. Mark Freeman 19
    14 March 2015 at 3:33 pm

    “the formation of social connections in the short-term” doesn’t appear to me to be of much relevance to the issue we are debating. The majority of children/adolescents would be in a situation with new peers/contacts probably 4 or 5 times at a minimum by age advancing through ECE, Primary, Intermediate, Secondary, Tertiary, Cultural, Sporting, Church Groups etc – not to mention new additions to wider family. This by not moving house once. So it happens, all the time, for most people. Why are you denying reality? More importantly, why do you want to consign adaptable people to detrimental circumstances and convince them that they don’t have many valid choices?

    • One Anonymous Bloke 19.1
      14 March 2015 at 3:37 pm

      I don’t – that’s just your feeble accusation, motivated by hate – that simply doesn’t stand scrutiny – if the left is so unconcerned about poor people, how come we always lower the unemployment rate?

      Why did the median and minimum wages outpace inflation under Lab5? Secretly, they just did it to make you hate us more, eh.

  20. Mark Freeman 20
    14 March 2015 at 3:51 pm

    The only hate I see here is coming from a few long time commentors who share the idiology of the Blog. It’s easy to lower the unemployment rate if you bloat the State Sector with overpaid make-work “jobs”.The electorate has spoken 3 times now what they think about that idea.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 20.1
      14 March 2015 at 4:00 pm

      Gosh, your ‘argument’ would really fail if it turned out that there were more civil servants and higher government spending under National, eh. I do hope you know what you’re talking about.

      I haven’t checked, yet, and I have a sneaky suspicion you might be talking through your hat. Shall I check or do you want to? It will be less humiliating for you if you’re wrong and you find out on your own.

      Still, let’s examine your hate some more, eh. Confronted with evidence that dislocation has a net negative effect, you ran your mouth, blithering about people who trash houses. That was your knee-jerk response – a load of hate.

      PS: I checked: you’d better act quickly before I rub your face in it 😆

    • Murray Rawshark 20.2
      14 March 2015 at 4:02 pm

      The Northland electorate spoke in 2014 because vital information had been kept from them. I suppose you support that as well.

  21. Mark Freeman 21
    14 March 2015 at 4:09 pm

    Your argument may fail if you had to provide evidence regarding minimum & medium wages. Yeah, I hate people who trash houses that belong to the Taxpayer or other parties then cry poor. People who excuse that or try and blame it on this Govt or our successful economic system I just laugh at for their ignorance.

    • Colonial Rawshark 21.1
      14 March 2015 at 4:23 pm

      How about a born to rule class who trash the assets of an entire nation, selling it off for cheap? You cool with that?

      • Mark Freeman 21.1.1
        14 March 2015 at 5:40 pm

        “born to rule class” – I guess you you are putting the PM in that? “Trashing the assets of an entire nation, selling it off for cheap” – do you mean selling a minority share of SOE’s and spending the proceeds predominantly on people who have contributed very little to them? Or was it the attempted trashing of the value of these SOE’s pre-float by the GLIMP’s?

        • Colonial Rawshark 21.1.1.1
          14 March 2015 at 6:05 pm

          So you endorse National trashing the asset holdings of the nation as long as those assets go to big international capita (and local hanger ons)? This is of course who National serves.

          That’s pretty transparent.

          • Mark Freeman 21.1.1.1.1
            14 March 2015 at 8:12 pm

            I think what is pretty transparent is your inability to support your statements. Please explain how the asset holdings of the nation have been trashed. You may want to justify how Electricity prices rose far more under the last Govt than this one. Are you aware of the potential threat to the financial returns of the Electricity Sector by self-gen, ETS etc? I would rather see those risks covered (even if only 49%) by the private sector. But the Labour/Green economic retards still owe the NZ taxpayer at least $150 Million by their pointless sabotage..are you putting your hand up to cover some of that?

            • One Anonymous Bloke 21.1.1.1.1.1
              14 March 2015 at 8:15 pm

              “Economic retards” who always get better per capita GDP than the National Party. Oops: own goal Mark. Your team won’t be happy you gave me that gimme.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 21.2
      14 March 2015 at 4:31 pm

      Every house trashing event I’ve ever witnessed – not participated in, I hasten to add – was committed by university students. So much for your false narrative.

      And now it’s time for your reality check.

      State service employees, timeline. Oops.

  22. Mark Freeman 22
    14 March 2015 at 4:11 pm

    But again this is a sideshow to your oppression of people who could easily insert themselves into a happier situation. Maybe that helps you feel superior?

    • Colonial Rawshark 22.1
      14 March 2015 at 4:25 pm

      You should really take out an exit visa from John Key Land and get to know a few real Kiwis who are trying to make ends meet on six or seven hundred dollars a week.

      • Mark Freeman 22.1.1
        14 March 2015 at 5:46 pm

        I know plenty of them, and that’s often been my reality. I tend to encourage people to get themselves in a better situation, and work on how I can increase my earning potential & reality. It seems to be more effective than blaming anyone else for the situation. What about you?

        • Colonial Rawshark 22.1.1.1
          14 March 2015 at 6:03 pm

          And if the private sector refuses to create good jobs, it is the duty of government to do so.

          • Mark Freeman 22.1.1.1.1
            14 March 2015 at 7:28 pm

            That’s a really interesting view. How exactly does the private sector “refuse to create good jobs” and what in your view is a “good job”?
            Conversely, what is a “good employee”?

            • One Anonymous Bloke 22.1.1.1.1.1
              14 March 2015 at 8:22 pm

              The thing is Mark, you don’t actually know what the answers to your questions are.

              If you had a clue, you’d realise that a good employee (or employer for that matter) is a well-educated one. Then, you’d notice the fact that the most influential factor in education outcomes is household income.

              And then everything you believe is bullshit. Sorry about that.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 22.2
      14 March 2015 at 4:32 pm

      No, it makes me pity you, that you can’t form an argument, so you make up bullshit strawmen.

  23. Theblackkitten 23
    14 March 2015 at 5:05 pm

    I agree, this can not continue to go on.
    The issue is supply and demand otherwise why is there also a shortage on rentals?
    It is not only first home buyers who are locked out of the Auckland market, it is also middle wage earners who can no longer afford home ownership in Auckland.
    The problem is, the investors use their current home as leverage to purchase more properties. They are foreigners and Nzers who have been fortunate to purchase their first home before this shortage. Due to the leverage they have, they have better purchasing power than first home buyers for the limited stock available and can afforded the higher prices. Because they pay higher prices, they charge higher rent and can because rent stock is also being strangled.
    The key is more supply to fix this issue.
    And the issue with living in provincial towns is lack of work that will afford a lifestyle to pay the mortgage for a home. Yes the prices are low in comparison with Auckland, but look at the wages and how many jobs there are available. If it was as simple is moving to these areas, the now thousands of lower and middle income earners locked out of the Auckland housing market would have migrated years ago.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 23.1
      14 March 2015 at 10:53 pm

      The problem is: shit right wing policies that you pay lip service to and vote for, keeping wages low. Oh noes, your personal responsibility!

  24. Mark Freeman 24
    14 March 2015 at 5:49 pm

    Interesting how you discount or denigrate comments pertaining to my own experiences or reality yet “lap up” similar from those who share your (narrow) world view.

  25. Mark Freeman 25
    14 March 2015 at 7:36 pm

    Decent humans don’t convince other decent humans that they are incapable of any influence over their own outcomes.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 25.1
      14 March 2015 at 8:05 pm

      All you need now is the moment where anyone did that. Get a clue: your false account of my beliefs is not my beliefs.